Another no knock warrant goes bad

[Fargo]

Gentlemen,

Lets take just the smallest of steps back here. Heaven knows I'm no fan of no-knock warrants. The inherent risk of harm to innocents simply does not sit well with me other than in extreme circumstances. However, there is simply nothing in the articles posted on this case that indicates that the wrong house was hit or that there was not sufficient justification for the judge to issue the warrant.

These are warrants by judges and their questionable constitutionality has been upheld. That said, I think that the threshold used by judges to grant them is way too low and that they are used far too routinely. If one wishes to trash no-knock warrants there are ample cases to use, such as Kathryn Johnston who was murdered by corrupt narc cops who perjured themselves to get the warrant and then planted drugs on her corpse. Another example is the above referenced mayor in MD.

My point is that perhaps we should not assume a ton of facts not in evidence about this particular raid where 4 cops were shot; for all we know there was sufficient justification and this was a turd who wanted to shoot cops rather than go away. Simply for the sake of making an effective argument, there are plenty of cases out there which are well documented and can easily be used.

Once again, I'm not defending these things. I've discussed them with the door kickers at some length and IMO they are inherently reckless in most circumstances and the threshold used by the judiciary is far too low. I just don't think that it helps those who are criticizing them to immediately assume facts not in evidence.

Joe

 

[wally05]

I have to say that this is a wee bit un-realistic. Yes your family would sue but there are two inherent problems with that. 1st you are already dead and no amount of money will change that nor will it comfort your friends and family in your absence. 2nd no matter how many trust worthy police officers there are, there are those that will and do lie to cover their asses. Just recently there was an incident out of Virginia I believe in which a small town mayor's house was raided. Afterwhich he overheard one of the "raiding" police officers making up "facts" in order to exculpate any liability on the part of the police.

Yep, it's called "creative report writing." A term that sadly, I have heard said by some Officers when I lived up north and some down here. There are a ton of good cops, but there are also many bad ones. All it takes is them modifying that report and you are screwed. It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. If they broke down my door... I don't know what I'd do, but I'd make sure my family is safe.

There are enough instances of police impersonators that they say to pull into a lit area if you are getting pulled over and ask for ID, why can't we defend ourselves against possible impersonators breaking down our doors? It's something that needs to be addressed.

 

[wally05]

Gentlemen,

Lets take just the smallest of steps back here. Heaven knows I'm no fan of no-knock warrants. The inherent risk of harm to innocents simply does not sit well with me other than in extreme circumstances. However, there is simply nothing in the articles posted on this case that indicates that the wrong house was hit or that there was not sufficient justification for the judge to issue the warrant.

These are warrants by judges and their questionable constitutionality has been upheld. That said, I think that the threshold used by judges to grant them is way too low and that they are used far too routinely. If one wishes to trash no-knock warrants there are ample cases to use, such as Kathryn Johnston who was murdered by corrupt narc cops who perjured themselves to get the warrant and then planted drugs on her corpse. Another example is the above referenced mayor in MD.

My point is that perhaps we should not assume a ton of facts not in evidence about this particular raid where 4 cops were shot; for all we know there was sufficient justification and this was a turd who wanted to shoot cops rather than go away. Simply for the sake of making an effective argument, there are plenty of cases out there which are well documented and can easily be used.

Once again, I'm not defending these things. I've discussed them with the door kickers at some length and IMO they are inherently reckless in most circumstances and the threshold used by the judiciary is far too low. I just don't think that it helps those who are criticizing them to immediately assume facts not in evidence.

Joe

True, but sadly, we live in a world that emphasizes "Security" over "Freedom." Now what did our founding fathers say about that? It seems like their statement is true and no knocks are a part of that. The thing is, it's a difficult problemt to address, so instead of trying to address it, the justice system supports taking away rights in favor of security instead of trying to find a balance... it's just easier that way to them.

And no, we don't know the evidence, but I think these no knocks bother people and they wanted to talk about it. These are hypotheticals.

 

[Indy317]

I agree, you serve a search warrant at the door, not the foot of their bed. Too many good people dying because of this....

What difference does that make? One could just shoot through the door.

What were/are your feelings on their risk factor versus element of surprise?

No-knock warrants are just a bad idea...regardless of whether or not the occupant of the house is guilty, if they have guns readily at hand for whatever reason, be it self-defense or otherwise, a no-knock will result in a gun fight. This isn't even touching the unconstitutionality of them.

Here are the issues with only having knock and announce warrants:

Warrant to search for evidence:

"Knock-knock" "Police, we have a warrant to search, open the door." If the evidence is drugs, you hear water being run as they flush them down a drain. If the evidence is some data on a computer, the computer gets powered down, encrypting the hard disk. If the evidence is something else, like on paper, you start hearing smoke detectors go off as they burn them or their now encrypted hard disk (or see smoke coming from the chimney). So evidence is now lost. Some will say "Well, the cops should wait until the home is empty!" Well, large scale stash houses will likely never been totally empty. Others, yes, they might be empty, but how long do you wait? If the issue is child solicitation or some sort of kidnapping (custodial or otherwise), how long does LE wait for the suspect who might have info to leave so they can safely search the home for evidence? Then, if you decide to wait for the person to leave, cops have got to sit on the home, so officers are racking up OT waiting hours, days for a person to finally need to leave the home.

Warrant to search and/or arrest an individual:
Any person who is going to jail could become dangerous. I guess we could "test" all people with warrants by calling them and asking them to turn themselves in. Those that don't should be considered dangerous, as it should be taken as deviance to surrender. So then we have to get two armored personnel carriers and go to the property. Put one carrier on opposite corners of the home. Then we call the home, or use a PA and demand the person surrender. If they don't, you gas the home. If they still don't come out, then what? You have to sit and wait them out. Gotta cut power, gas, water. Can you do that without affecting the entire neighborhood? What if it is well known they guy is heavily armed with battle rifles and we have a new vinyl village neighborhood. How easy would it be for stray .308 rounds to go through those kind of constructed homes? So now we have to evacuate surrounding homes? What if the guy is prepped to deal with a prolonged lock down in his home? How much will over-time for the cops be? Now he has fortified his home, meaning any assault on the home will likely result in cop(s) being shot.

In the end, yea, cops could always wait the person out. I think that almost anyone would either eventually come out and give up, commit suicide by cop, or kill themselves. The question is: Do we allow the surprise of a no-knock, or do we risk having to do all the above, disrupting neighborhoods, other people, costing municipalities money, etc..

Yea, they could try to take them after they leave the home, but then again, you gotta pay people to sit on the home. How long we gonna do that? What if the guy knows he is wanted and is never going to leave, at least not for a few weeks? Then after he finally does leave, how do you take them then? If they are not going back and insist on a shootout, then you have bullets flying all over the place.

Either way, people will complain. The cops should have done this, they should have done that. I don't want to pay another $250/year in property taxes due to police over-time for sitting and doing surveillance.


I understand that if you are an innocent person, that if people are kicking in your door yelling "POLICE!" why you would shoot back. We hear plenty of news stories about criminals pulling home invasion robberies acting like police. If you believe the answer is an end to no-knocks, then how do you think the cops should handle search and arrest warrants? Should we not worry about losing evidence in cases? What if that evidence isn't stuff like drugs, but more in terms of information about a coming terrorist attack, the location of a missing child, etc.? With arrest warrants, especially with suspects who have access to heavy weapons, how should those be handled (don't say "with a knock on the door." Bullets easily go through most doors).

 

[XMil]

What percentage of no knocks do you estimate are issued for narcotics?

 

[IndianasFinest]

Wow, my Mother lives in the next town over from where this happend. I can tell you one thing, Lakewood is a known area for narcotics, and other bad happenings.

 

[Jack Ryan]

Warrant to search for evidence:

"Knock-knock" "Police, we have a warrant to search, open the door." If the evidence is drugs, you hear water being run as they flush them down a drain. If the evidence is some data on a computer, the computer gets powered down, encrypting the hard disk. If the evidence is something else, like on paper, you start hearing smoke detectors go off as they burn them or their now encrypted hard disk (or see smoke coming from the chimney). So evidence is now lost. Some will say "Well, the cops should wait until the home is empty!" Well, large scale stash houses will likely never been totally empty. Others, yes, they might be empty, but how long do you wait? If the issue is child solicitation or some sort of kidnapping (custodial or otherwise), how long does LE wait for the suspect who might have info to leave so they can safely search the home for evidence? Then, if you decide to wait for the person to leave, cops have got to sit on the home, so officers are racking up OT waiting hours, days for a person to finally need to leave the home.

Life is tuff in a free country full of citizens isn't it.

“I don’t give a *******,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.”
“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”
“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"You don't get everything you want. A dictatorship would be a lot easier." Describing what it's like to be governor of Texas. [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](Governing Magazine 7/98)[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]-- From Paul Begala's "Is Our Children Learning?" [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"I told all four that there are going to be some times where we don't agree with each other, but that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator," Bush joked.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]-- CNN.com, December 18, 2000[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it, " [Bush] said.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]-- Business Week, July 30, 2001[/FONT]​

[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama described the U.S. Constitution as having “deep flaws” during a September 2001 Chicago public radio program, adding that the country’s Founding Fathers had “an enormous blind spot” when they wrote it. ​

Some times a guy has to just sit with gaping jaw wondering how the heck we ever got here..., other times it's as plain as a one road map from A to B.​

Thank God and the people who set up this country for the shreds of the constitution that are left and may those who've ripped it to shreds rot in ever lasting fire. The quicker they get there the better.

How this is relevant to your comments is where do you think we would be right now with out the protections that make your job difficult rather than easy with the kind of people in charge who have been running this country the last 40 years?

I'd rather see every dope head and dope dealer in the country set free and every drug law on the books abolished than to give up another inch or single letter of what the constitution of this country protects.

If that makes the job of law enforcement difficult then I say look for a new job.​

[/FONT]​

​

 

[sig1473]

Absolutely cops make up facts. I used to do ride-alongs with one of my buddies who is a cop(won't name the agency but rhymes with pooper). When he would arrest people on OWIs, he would just sit on the computer and just fill in the blanks with the pertinent information. Slurring speach, redshot eyes, and so forth were already in the report even if the person didn't have any of these "inhibitors". I agree, there are some good cops out there, but also a lot of them are on power trips and liars. Just my HO.

 

[zebov]

I would say err on the side of losing evidence and keeping people innocent until proven guilty, esp. in the case of drug violations. Anyone who can get rid of all the evidence against them in the 30 seconds between an officer identifying himself at the door and busting in didn't do something heinous enough to risk many lives in a no-knock warrant. What's more important to you: preservation of evidence or preservation of life?

 

[mrjarrell]

I would say err on the side of losing evidence and keeping people innocent until proven guilty, esp. in the case of drug violations. Anyone who can get rid of all the evidence against them in the 30 seconds between an officer identifying himself at the door and busting in didn't do something heinous enough to risk many lives in a no-knock warrant. What's more important to you: preservation of evidence or preservation of life?

You know what the answer to that is. +1

 

[Soundslikejosh]

<snip>
why compund the chances of being shot by walking out with a gun, blazing away without IDing the potential target?

<snip>

THIS!!!!

Personally, I find it alarming the number of internet rambos who claim that they will jump out of bed, half asleep, grab a gun, run out of their room, and start blazing. Some night someone is going to shoot their wife after she drops a dish during her midnight snack. Loud noises at night aren't a reason to shoot at anything. KNOW YOUR TARGET.

If you holed up in your bedroom, as Disposable Heart and many others have recommended, you would have allowed the cops time to ID themselves and you time to announce your intent to defend youself.

 

[Mrmonte]

THIS!!!!
I find it alarming the number of internet rambos who claim that they will jump out of bed, half asleep, grab a gun, run out of their room, and start blazing. Some night someone is going to shoot their wife after she drops a dish during her midnight snack. Loud noises at night aren't a reason to shoot at anything. KNOW YOUR TARGET.

That will teach her not to drop the good dishes! But seriously, I agree with what your saying. No knock or whatever else may happen, your home is not the place to stage a one man tactical assault. Think defensively and how to best protect you and loved ones, not the TV set.

 

[Jack Ryan]

THIS!!!!

Personally, I find it alarming the number of internet rambos who claim that they will jump out of bed, half asleep, grab a gun, run out of their room, and start blazing. Some night someone is going to shoot their wife after she drops a dish during her midnight snack. Loud noises at night aren't a reason to shoot at anything. KNOW YOUR TARGET.

If you holed up in your bedroom, as Disposable Heart and many others have recommended, you would have allowed the cops time to ID themselves and you time to announce your intent to defend youself.

Good plan. The cops should think all this out better when they are wide awake sitting in a well lit squad room full of all their buddies who are all going to be backing them up right or wrong against who ever they happen to be breaking in on in the middle of the night.

 

[Drail]

I think the best way to address this problem is to require any judge who would sign off on a no-knock midnight warrant has to be the point man on the stick. I would also require the judge to go through the door with no SWAT training and no vest. Shouldn't be very long before we see no more of these stupid warrants.

 

[Indy317]

Life is tuff in a free country full of citizens isn't it.

"Free country," if that isn't laughable. There will never be such a thing as a "free country."

When he would arrest people on OWIs, he would just sit on the computer and just fill in the blanks with the pertinent information. Slurring speach, redshot eyes, and so forth were already in the report even if the person didn't have any of these "inhibitors". I agree, there are some good cops out there, but also a lot of them are on power trips and liars. Just my HO.

A lot of police officers get blasted by non-cops for "turning a blind eye" to this sort of thing when they witness it being done by bad cops. A fair enough criticism. What I want to know, what did you do when you saw this blatant miscarriage of justice? Did you contact the prosecutor's office? Did you call the FBI civil rights division? Did you contact the public defenders office?

Anyone who can get rid of all the evidence against them in the 30 seconds between an officer identifying himself at the door and busting in didn't do something heinous enough to risk many lives in a no-knock warrant. What's more important to you: preservation of evidence or preservation of life?

What is more important to you: Finding possible information on the location of an abducted loved one of yours, or preserving the life of the person who has said evidence? As far as the 30 seconds, I guess you have never heard of fortified positions? It honestly doesn't take much to fortify a basic home. It would take something a lot more than 30 seconds to get into my doors. If I was involved in criminal activity, I would make sure my windows were those of hurricane glass/film and that I could shutter them with inside metal shutters.

Any attempt to breach that would take much longer then 30 seconds, plenty of time for me to burn up any documents of where I put the hundreds of thousands of dollars I stole from my employees pension funds. Then again, one really doesn't need to do this. As soon as the cops and their mandated knock and announce arrives, fire off some fire crackers and make them think its gun shots. They will retreat to a safe place which will give the person inside plenty of time to destroy evidence.

I think the best way to address this problem is to require any judge who would sign off on a no-knock midnight warrant has to be the point man on the stick. I would also require the judge to go through the door with no SWAT training and no vest. Shouldn't be very long before we see no more of these stupid warrants.

Why stop there? Why not just make judges be responsible for carrying out the actions outlined in the warrant? Shouldn't be very long before we no more warrants of any kind!!

 

[sig1473]

A lot of police officers get blasted by non-cops for "turning a blind eye" to this sort of thing when they witness it being done by bad cops. A fair enough criticism. What I want to know, what did you do when you saw this blatant miscarriage of justice? Did you contact the prosecutor's office? Did you call the FBI civil rights division? Did you contact the public defenders office

I'm not going to narc on my friend at the time.

 

[public servant]

A lot of police officers get blasted by non-cops for "turning a blind eye" to this sort of thing when they witness it being done by bad cops. A fair enough criticism. What I want to know, what did you do when you saw this blatant miscarriage of justice? Did you contact the prosecutor's office? Did you call the FBI civil rights division? Did you contact the public defenders office?

If you're not going to do anything about it...then you have no right to complain about it. You witnessed it. You knew about it and did nothing.




I'm not going to narc on my friend at the time.[/quote]

 

[sig1473]

If you're not going to do anything about it...then you have no right to complain about it. You witnessed it. You knew about it and did nothing.




I'm not going to narc on my friend at the time.

[/quote]


Just a question? What am I complaining about? Absolutely nothing. It was an observation and fact that things like that go on everyday in the US.

 

[gunner4564]

no-knock warrents are garbage and shouldn't be allowed in a free country.

 

[Indy317]

no-knock warrents are garbage and shouldn't be allowed in a free country.

Nor the forced taxation for:

A military
Emergency medical services
Sidewalks
Police
Fire suppression and/or rescue services
Jails
Welfare
Education
Healthcare
Roads

Ask yourself, how badly do you really want a "free" country?