I would have to disagree with this. The OP (ASSUMING he is telling the truth about his actions) was not part of the incident. The shelter clown had no cause to call in a complaint about him sitting in the parking lot. For him to assume that the 2nd mustang was associtated with the first and up to no good is assinine.
Frankly if I was the op and his brother I would be writing a letter of complaint to the shelter supervisor reporting their employees actions and requesting a meeting. Again this is assuming the op is giving us the whole story. There is likely more to the brothers story and it would come out as a result of the letter. But i would definately be writing a complaint to the shelter for their employees assumptions and his reporting me unnecessarily to the police.
My best guess, based on too many years of experience tells me the first brother made a fool of himself at the shelter, most likely managed by people who do not deal with confrontation really well. They are in the busines of assisting displaced animals find good homes.
I can just hear the first brother referencing his "backup" is soon to arrive in the form of brother #2. The shelter folks tell him to leave, they have called the police. He flees, texts brother #2 and tries to call him off. Brother #2 arrives on scene, the shelter workers update the call to police with the fact there is a second vehicle now at their business, just as brother #1 threatened.
The arriving offers now have not only the first call, they have an updated, higher priority situation unfolding with clear evidence that coincides with the callers information i.e., second car and when questioned brother #2 provides evidence linking his brother to the callers information.
What we don't know ( and the only part that really counts) is what was the disposition? Yes, the officer tells brother #2 to leave but we do not know what action (if any) the police took with brother #1 - the real culprit here.
The shelter employees have every legal right to refuse to serve a belligerent customer. Once he raises the level of the confrontation, they have every legal right to request a police response. It is clear they were intimidated by the presence of the second car (brother #2) so they placed a second call, elevating the urgency.
You may think the OP is not part of the incident; but your opinion is not based on experience gained dealing with such issues first hand. We know he was involved, since the arriving police knew to stop him. He became involved when he did not follow his brothers request he waive off. His brother knew he was in trouble and also knew his brother's arrival would spark further fear in the eyes of the "victims".
Again; I would love to read that letter! :lol: