President's Editorial

I have been approached and asked my professional opinions concerning this matter by both Mr. Vargas and Mr. Phiffer, Esq. on several occasions.

I explained to Mr. Phiffer, there is no statute currently authorizing the use of either a uniform or a badge for a process server, therefore the opposite is true.

But the real problem lies in how they appear and are perceived by the general public and law enforcement. I added that 10 years ago I asked 2 current Sheriff's and several attorney's about what constitutes impersonation and that I had the desire to have a shirt and badge manufactured for this purpose (service of process) professional identification reasons only.

There are current state and federal statutes that outline what you can not wear (color, style, etc.), have on your person, design or shape or facsimile of as far as uniforms and official authorized law enforcement badges. I was informed by a majority conclusion of advice as follows.

It must not in any way shape or form resemble any current law enforcement office or other agency, but not limited to any listed by statute, i.e. FBI, CIA, Secret Service, Marshall, Forest Ranger, Paramedic, Fire-fighter, etc. The badge nor uniform can be similar to any existing agency official authorized attire.

It must be in such a style and format that if you placed your person wearing what you have had designed beside any type of authorized law enforcement officer 20 feet away, that you could visibly tell the difference between them.

At that point I did not pursue the uniform, but did have a very distinctive badge designed and manufactured for the purpose of process serving with the inscription "Colorado Process Server" engraved upon them and no state seal for the insert (as I have asked the secretary of state concerning it usage......we are not authorized to use it) and have had them registered by copyright. It was not till many years later (2006) that we as a company finally decided and finalized how are uniforms were to look (color, style and type).

Our field agents now are equipped with uniform, caps, and badges with corresponding official company ID badges to be worn at all times while on duty (company policy) all uniform, badge, cap, and ID have "Process Server" either engraved, printed or embroidered upon them in large bold print.

I conversed with Mr. Crowe, director of the National Association Process Server (NAPPS) concerning this issue to get his thoughts. I wish to personally thank Mr. Crowe for his input and years of experience. Mr. Crowe stated that though he is neither for nor against this, he went on to provide this insight.

The only reason a person wears a badge, uniform and ID is to look official (someone acting with authority). He added, there is nothing in the statute that gives the process server ANY AUTHORITY or OFFICIAL status. He also stated, that this is an option up to the wearer, but he cautioned its use, "wearer be warned".

I pointed out that as a professional myself, I use these items to separate and distinguish myself APART from law enforcement while also providing the general public a sense of security in knowing that we're not some sort of crack pot just walking to their door, or some sort of door-to-door salesman. I added, that as a professional I want it clear in any person's mind who I am, what I am doing, and why I am there.

 The primary reason we chose a uniform, badge, cap, and ID is the recent increase of persons going around intentionally and deliberately with intent to deceive unsuspecting persons (victims) by claiming to be law enforcement officers (here I pointed out, with intent to do some sort of criminal activity; i.e. rape, theft, car jacking, robbery, etc.).

I added that I disagreed about his statement about authority, as we are allowed some applicable authority inheritably provided by current statutes to carry out due process of law and that is all. I can certainly speak for myself, but I know for a fact that many other process servers would never dare tell anyone at any time that they were something (law enforcement) that they weren't, for this vary reason (pending litigation on charges of impersonating an officer).

I have included this in our companies employee training. We are never to intentionally or unintentionally act out of willful criminal intent.

I have personally worn my credentials (badge, ID and uniform) for 10 years, minus the uniform and cap until recently. I have actually had defendants, law enforcement and attorney's thank me for my professional demeanor and attire (including two sitting judges commenting on our professionalism on the record and in open court) and being requested to appear professionally and personally by 3 judges.

I have appeared on many occasions in court with said same attire (for various professional reasons) and yet to date over 10 years of professional service, I have never been questioned or charged with such a crime. I feel you would have to deliberately with willful and wonting intent to deceive or misrepresent yourself as something other than a process server to receive such a charge.

 My companies staff appearance in the field is such, there is no question as to who we are or about.

The only time I am ever asked if I am law enforcement is usually by some toddler.

What remains with this particular case remains to be heard. Personally something is missing to this story. I know this server personally and find it hard to believe that he would go around claiming to be law enforcement, and the fact no complaint was given by the defendant being served (the opposite actually happened) even in the presence of the officer charging the server.

Bottom line, "Where's the criminal intent"?