I can see both sides to this incident. On one hand, what were the police supposed to do when they get a call like that? On the other hand, an innocent person was put in cuffs and treated like a criminal. And to add a twist -- she's now thinking about filing a lawsuit police brutality.

I have to disagree with gundies on this topic. The police are professionals, but for the safety of themselves, crime victims, and even to protect suspects, they can't wait to determine all the circumstances before reacting.

To be effective, police are trained to secure the situation and protect the lives of all of the participants first. If the initial response indicates that the individuals at risk can be protected, they act. They act quickly, efficiently, and ideally with overwhelming force.

Proper procedure did show she was not a danger to others. Proper procedure first dictated that they secure the situation to allow the officers (and the installers they thought were victims) to go home that night.

Before folks get their gundies in a bunch on this one, realize that the folks that respond to these instances often have to face difficult decisions made in seconds. If they had not locked down the situation, they face the criticism of not moving fast enough (a la the columbine reaction). Instead, a civilian was put in handcuffs and everyone was safe.

100+ hits and 3 comments? There's got to be more interest in this topic, as over 100 people have clicked on this forum. However, only 3 people have logged their comments (and one of those is the editor of this newspaper!).

All you have to do to get in on this topic is to register on the site. See the "register" button in the upper left hand corner of the home page. You'll be asked to provide your screen name and some basic information. Then you'll be prompted with an e-mail back to you to complete the process. When you add your comment to a forum, others will only see your screen name (which you select). The rest of the information is kept confidential.

So, please comment away! There seems to be plenty of interest.

I have a couple of comments.
- I believe the police department acted appropriately. Seriously folks, reverse the situation. If the home-owner called and said two guys were holding her hostage, would we expect the police to "evaluate all circumstances before reacting?" Not for a minute. We'd want the offenders handcuffed until we found out it was a farce -- and we wouldn't think anything was inappropriate.
- The responsibility for this whole misunderstanding rests on the DirectTV employees -- both the jokesters and the dispatcher. Not on the homeowner (who most likely didn't even know the reference to being held hostage had been made), nor on the police department, nor on the residents of Savage.

i only see one side to this particular story. What had happend in this whole incident is in my opinion completly wrong. The fact that the police had talked TALKED to the DirectTV workers before they had entered the house knowing that there was NO HOSTAGE SITUATION, and by that i mean how could there be any possible way that there was a hostage situation when the workers themselves were out of the house packing their stuff up?!?!. Julie Pyle was my art teacher throughout all of my elementary school years, she is by far one of the most caring people i have ever meet and the fact that the police treated this situation the way they did is very discouraging. I belive that there should be a formal appoligy by the city of Savage police and the DirectTV staff.

thank you.