Harford County Sheriff Jeffrey Gahler on Wednesday announced a major overhaul to Harford County Sheriff’s Office policies on the handling of domestic violence cases, expansions he said are intended to prevent escalation of domestic altercations into violent incidents.
While the new policies were officially announced this week, deputies have been working under a version of them since March. The overhaul was itself part of a review of all agency policies which began when Gahler took office in December.
The three new policies specify how deputies are to handle domestic incidents generally; how they enforce domestic violence court orders such as peace and protective orders; and how they handle firearms recovered during domestic-related calls.
They are intended to correct earlier guidelines which Gahler said were vague and caused the agency to “underperform” when responding to domestic-related calls for service.
“The Sheriff’s Office wasn’t where it needed to be in terms of domestic violence,” he said.
A key component of the new directives is the requirement that all domestic-related calls for service will result in a written report. That report will be forwarded to the Sheriff’s Office domestic violence unit for further action, in an “attempt to prevent incidents from rising to the level of criminal activity,” Gahler said.
The policies also provide expended and more up-to-date legal definitions of a variety of domestic incident related terms, and remove some deputy discretion in handling such incidents. Importantly, the new guidelines require deputies in many cases to arrest and charge an offender. Previously, deputies provided information for victims to find their own domestic violence attorney and seek charges themselves through a court commissioner—but many did not.
Domestic violence is a deeply troubling and destructive issue that affects individuals and families across all walks of life. It often goes unreported due to fear, shame, or a lack of understanding of the legal options available. However, finding the courage to stand against abuse is a crucial first step towards breaking free from an abusive relationship. Victims of domestic violence need to know that they are not alone and that there are resources and legal protections in place to help them regain control of their lives.
Expert guidance from a dedicated domestic violence lawyer can make a significant difference in securing safety and justice. Family Law Toowoomba has a wealth of professionals who specialize in cases of domestic abuse, offering compassionate support and the necessary legal expertise. The attorneys at Patterson & Co Family Law understand the complexities of such sensitive matters and are committed to ensuring that victims of domestic violence receive the protection they deserve, fighting for their rights with determination and experience.
“We know from experience, men and women who are the subjects of domestic violence are not always in a mindset to help themselves.”
The changes are intended to create a standardized approach to domestic situations, “so they’re all going to be handled the same and we have some accountability,” said Major William Davis, commander of the agency’s police operations bureau.
Of the three homicides in Harford County this year, two were domestic-related, Gahler said. In some cases, a domestic dispute that is not properly addressed eventually escalates into a domestic assault, which in turn can result in a domestic homicide.
Following his election last fall, Gahler said he and his command staff identified the Sheriff’s Office domestic violence policies as an area of concern. In March, Davis issued initial instructions to all deputies regarding domestic violence incidents, which formed the core of the written policies unveiled this week.
Gahler said “at least 30” version of the policies were “vetted and revetted” through the spring, resulting in the final versions he signed in late May and early June.
The effect of the new policies was nearly instant, Gahler said, as the number of reports filed regarding domestic incidents jumped 100 percent in the month after Davis issued his instructions. Likewise, Gahler said the number of aggravated assaults reported by the agency under the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting statistics may spike this year. However, he emphasized that the statistical uptick does not reflect an increase in crime, but an increase in pre-existing crime that the Sheriff’s Office is now more accurately tracking and better handling.
That increase will also create additional need for SARC, the local organization which assists victims of domestic abuse. Gahler urged the public to consider supporting SARC’s support and services.
State’s Attorney Joseph Cassilly and his office were consulted during the policy revision process, and are prepared for any potential increase in the number of domestic cases they see, according to Sgt. Paul Ruszala. The new policies will also assist their prosecutorial efforts, as the cases will be built on the work of deputies rather than a charge sought through a court commissioner.
“Their volume has stayed about the same, except now they’re getting an investigation,” he said. “Whereas before, they were getting a citizen complaint through the commissioner.”
Gahler praised the ongoing work of his deputies, saying the change in policy did not reflect a failure on their part, but a need for the Sheriff’s Office as a whole to modernize and improve their instructions to those deputies.
“We are just doing a better job,” he said. “The office was not where it needed to be.”
The new policies in their entirety appear below.
MAN2300A (Domestic Violence) by daggerpress
MAN2300C (Firearms Related to Domestic Violence) by daggerpress
MAN2300B (Domestic Violence Court Orders) by daggerpress
Thank you Sheriff Gahler for trying to improving things. The fat pig female deputy did nothing for us. I hope you get some people in there that will do a good job, like the two that came out first. Things would have turned out different if she had done her job in the beginning. Keep up the good work Sheriff.
Sheriff Gahler is doing a very good job in updating things at the Harford County Sheriff Department. Rumor at the wawa is that a lot of these updates were created because of a Corporal road supervisor who told her troops not to write a report on a domestic with violence. I hope this prevents that kind of stuff.
For the love of God, don’t let “Jim in Hickory” know you were at a WaWa. He’ll accuse you of incompetence.
The arrogant fat slob of a deputy that allowed things to become more violent in our case worked in his domestic violence unit. She’s useless, should be working as a crossing guard somewhere, if she could do that. I sure hope the Sheriff succeeds in this plan, as he’s a good man trying to do something good. I have much respect for many of the HARD working deputies, you know the ones who do their job correctly.
Sounds like reports of crime being ignored under Democrat Bane. Sounds right, can’t keep the fake crime numbers low and help victims in need. Thank god Sheriff Gahler cares.
Pretty sure I’m not O.K. with a deputy seizing a firearm that just happens to be in the house (not having be used during the domestic violence incident) What about seizing the kitchen knives and baseball bats too? This is B.S! Deputies have no legal grounds to arbitrarily seize a persons property that has not been used in a crime. That’s what judges are for. Gahler claims to be a friend of 2nd amendment rights – this makes him look like an Obama wannabe.
It is the law and Gahler has no option. Nice of you to talk at your ____, being “pretty sure” or in other words having no clue. Sheriff Gahler has done more for the 2A than anyother sheriff or chief and has done it in just a few months.
“Deputies have no legal grounds to arbitrarily seize a persons property that has not been used in a crime”
As a matter of fact, yes….they do.
Please cite the law that requires deputies to seize firearms not used in a crime
1. In Maryland, persons named as a respondent against whom a “non ex parte civil protective order” has been issued are prohibited from possessing a handgun or assault weapon.3 Moreover, no person may sell, rent or transfer a handgun or assault weapon to a person who is subject to a current “non ex parte civil protective order” issued pursuant to Md. Code Ann., Fam. Law § 4-506.4 Federal law also prohibits the purchase and possession of firearms and ammunition by certain domestic violence protective order defendants.
2. A final domestic violence protective order issued under Maryland Code Ann., Family Law § 4-506 must order the person subject to the order to surrender to law enforcement any firearm in his or her possession, and to refrain from possession of any firearm for the duration of the protective order.5
Maryland authorizes, but does not require, courts issuing temporary domestic violence protective orders to require the subject of such order to surrender all firearms in the person’s possession and require that the person refrain from gun possession for the duration of the temporary order.6 The court may order the surrender of guns in these instances if the abuse consisted of:
Use of a firearm by the respondent against the person to be protected;
Threat by the respondent to use a firearm against the person to be protected;
Serious bodily harm by the respondent to a person to be protected; or
Threat by the respondent to cause serious bodily harm to a person to be protected
Law enforcement receiving a firearm lawfully surrendered must transport and store the firearm safely while the protective order is in effect.8 Maryland law addresses the retaking of possession of the firearm at the expiration of a protective order.
3. Maryland allows a law enforcement officer responding to an alleged domestic violence incident to remove a firearm from the scene if he or she: 1) has probable cause to believe an act of domestic violence has occurred; and 2) observed the firearm on the scene during the response.10 The officer must provide information to the owner regarding the process for retrieving the firearm and must provide safe storage for the firearm during any related domestic violence legal proceeding.11 The owner may resume possession of the firearm at the conclusion of legal proceedings related to the domestic violence incident, unless ordered by a court to surrender the weapon.
As you requested:
Md. Code Ann., Pub. Safety §§ 5-101(g), 5-133(b)(1), (c), 5-134(b)(2).
Md. Code Ann., Pub. Safety § 5-206.
Md. Code Ann., Pub. Safety § 5-133(b)(8).
Md. Code Ann., Pub. Safety § 5-134(b)(10).
Md. Code Ann., Fam. Law § 4-506(f).
Md. Code Ann., Fam. Law § 4-505(a)(2)(viii).
Md. Code Ann., Fam. Law § 4-505(a)(2)(viii).
Md. Code Ann., Fam. Law § 4-506.1(a).
Md. Code Ann., Fam. Law § 4-506.1.
Md. Code Ann., Fam. Law § 4-511(a).
Md. Code Ann., Fam. Law § 4-511(b).
Md. Code Ann., Fam. Law § 4-511(c).
O.K. I’ll make it easy for you – Subsection 4-511 says;
When responding to the scene of an alleged act of domestic violence, as described in this subtitle, a law enforcement officer may remove a firearm from the scene if:
1. the law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that an act of domestic violence has occurred; and ¶
2. the law enforcement officer has observed the firearm on the scene during the response.
“MAY REMOVE” leaves the removal up to officer or departmental discretion so, you are wrong, the law does NOT require it, it allows it – a clear & distinct difference. Gahler is requiring the seizure NOT the law.
By way of apology for your incorrect (and rather snotty) response perhaps you could post a list of all the things Gahler has actually done, not talked about but actually accomplished that have furthered the cause of 2nd amendment rights for the average citizen in Harford County.
I have to admit you proved me wrong. Still disagree with you on how much the sheriff has done to promote and enhance 2A rights.
Unfortunately recidivism is extremely high with domestic violence cases, and far to many of these cases progressively escalate to include the utilization of weapons. In my humble opinion it’s a careful balance between ones 2nd amendment rights and keeping people safe in a potentially volatile environment. Bottom line, I believe Sheriff Gahler is doing the right thing in these circumstances.
What about the Sheriffs office deputies, corporals, seargents, etc. that committ domestic violence and use their weapon to do so. The employee gets smacked on the wrist and does it again and again. Punish the police for Domestic violence the same way the average person would be punished and held accountable for their actions. Like being fired. Get the message. Stop giving other police involved in Domestic violence a professional courtesy. If it does not stop more women and children will surely die.
Seems like he’s got you HCCA member. Shooting off your mouth without knowing the facts makes you look like the clueless one.
So you would rather a deputy leave a gun in the hands of a person accused of assault through domestic violence? May be you would like to tell that to all the families of victims of domestic homicide. If the deputy takes the gun and the suspect is found not guilty, the gun gets returned. Taking the gun protects the victim and believe it or not, the suspect too.
People like you give supporters of the 2nd amendment a bad name.
I follow the logic of “seizing” said firearm, okay.. But if said “accused” person is released of all wrong doings, in other words no criminal conviction I’ve read where it takes an act of god for said person to get their property back.
Its Maryland, after all, “agencies” are scared to death of liability and a firearm is deemed one of the most of evil inanimate objects thanks for our lawmakers.
Please add counter argument or corrections as needed to my “hear say”
That may be semi true for some agencies but for the HCSO and the most pro 2nd amendment champion in the State, the current sheriff, the gun will be returned with the acquittal or dismissal of charges
I actually applaud Gahler for this policy. Make it SOP and take any guess work out of the Deputy’s hands. With some of the deputies currently in Harford County, it makes perfect sense to take any responsibilities requiring thought from them. Good Job Gahler, now go arrest Sean Marston for committing perjury.
I object to this because it is wrong for Police Officers to seize someones personal property without a Judge ordering it just because they “might” do something illegal with it at some point in the future. We don’t allow Police to confiscate the cars of people who buy alcohol because they “might” get drunk and run over someone. Around 10,000 people a year are killed by drunk drivers, aren’t those people important too? If it was just about “safety” the police would be confiscating all manner if items from domestic violence scenes because It ignores the fact that the overwhelming majority of “weapons” used in Domestic Violence are NOT guns. Knives are used TWICE as often as guns, if this was about keeping people safe from what “might” happen then confiscating knives would keep twice as many safe. About 1,000 people a year are killed falling down the steps, why don’t we have the Police board up stairs in every house they visit too? It also ignores the fact that a gun could just as easily be used as a defense against an aggressor, imagine a drunken 250 pound man who comes home intent on beating up his 120 pound wife – he could do a lot of damage with his fists (or a knife) in the 5 or 10 minutes it takes the Police to arrive, what if she has a gun? This is about the Government using Domestic Violence as an excuse to seize guns from people under the pretense of safety. It is supported by gun hating folks using the image a battered woman to bolster their belief that guns are bad. Guns aren’t the problem, people are the problem. Taking away legally owned guns that have not been used in a crime does not make people safe. If you think it does I suggest a visit to the streets Chicago (or Baltimore) for an education in just how safe people are when no-one has any guns.
You have some great ideas, “Jay”.
Tell you what, run a successful campaign for office – bring a bill to the floor, and work to change the laws to your personal liking.
Until you raise the necessary campaign funds, go ahead and keep spewing stupid crap here on the site about what “you” object to.
Why the immature hate? Cant seem to produce a lucid argument against my point? I don’t need to change a law, I am pointing out what the law presently is and my disagreement with Gahlers choice to instruct Deputies to do something the law does not require. A shame that my objection seems like “stupid crap” to you – not everyone believes that everything elected officials choose for for us is always right.
Oh and st8trooper, you missed my point about cops seizing personal property, my concern is them doing it without a courts direction you have not provided any references to laws requiring Police Officers to seize weapons not used in a crime, (hope you are not a real cop – you guys dont get to make stuff up like this)
Need to put the BIG boy (girl) panties on and GROW UP. When the police from any agency is summoned to a incident people expect and usually demand a decision by the referee, i.e. police. If you don’t like the decision that may be rendered, either become the referee or DON’T call 911!! SMH.