At least they apologized : Police raid wrong house

[Duncan]

Youngstown News, Police raid wrong house in Struthers in drug sweep



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzdWPwVTWsI

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

OK, so the police did the right thing all the way around. They even apologized. You're in the hate the government most crowd, so I don't believe you were alerting us that everything worked out well this time. Is there some other point to the post?

 

[88GT]

No, they didn't do the right thing all the way around. Had they done the right thing, they would have been at the correct home, not the home of innocent people.

 

[IndySSD]

No, they didn't do the right thing all the way around. Had they done the right thing, they would have been at the correct home, not the home of innocent people.

^^^^

SFUSMC, I think that Duncan is just pointing out that a lot of LEA's are not only wrong, they're going wrong in a big way.... I mean these guys even had a picture of her actual son as identification..... I'd say that's pretty much not doing things the right way.

Don't get me wrong, I have lots of friends and some family that are LEO and I support the work that they do but this whole "Shock and awe neighborhood sweeps" method of law enforcement is a very slippery slope.

How much pot/coke/heroin do you need to confiscate before you can justify the loss of just one innocent persons life? Even if they don't kill someone, what if this guy is home alone and gets taken into custody, has charges filed against him, misses work, loses his job... maybe he's divorced and the X pushes to have his parental rights revoked because of all this? His life is mostly ruined if this happens.... for what?

I'm all for stopping criminal activity, I just can't advocate not having your **** together when you do it. The police need to be (and they USUALLY are) dead on with zero mistakes when they do these large scale warrant executions.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

No, they didn't do the right thing all the way around. Had they done the right thing, they would have been at the correct home, not the home of innocent people.

They were at the right house. The information they developed led them to the wrong David Fox. That was a mistake. They apologized for it.

The link reported no dead dogs, no terrorized children, no shot suspects, only a little sniffing in the herb garden. Yes they pointed a gun at the homeowner. Police do that when they serve warrants. But again, they apologized.

I'm all for jumping on tyranical acts by our government, but I don't understand the thought process that its still a tyranical act when its a case of mistaken identity that ends in little if any collateral damage. Especially when they apologize.

^^^^

SFUSMC, I think that Duncan is just pointing out that a lot of LEA's are not only wrong, they're going wrong in a big way.... I mean these guys even had a picture of her actual son as identification..... I'd say that's pretty much not doing things the right way.

Don't get me wrong, I have lots of friends and some family that are LEO and I support the work that they do but this whole "Shock and awe neighborhood sweeps" method of law enforcement is a very slippery slope.

How much pot/coke/heroin do you need to confiscate before you can justify the loss of just one innocent persons life? Even if they don't kill someone, what if this guy is home alone and gets taken into custody, has charges filed against him, misses work, loses his job... maybe he's divorced and the X pushes to have his parental rights revoked because of all this? His life is mostly ruined if this happens.... for what?

I'm all for stopping criminal activity, I just can't advocate not having your **** together when you do it. The police need to be (and they USUALLY are) dead on with zero mistakes when they do these large scale warrant executions.

I'm not at all for SWAT raids, unless of course they were absolutely necessary and executed flawlessly. I've said that time after time in these types of threads.

This is a different situation. Here you had the police own their mistake and apologize for it. Was it tramatic for the homeowner? Probably. But when are the police, in any number, showing up at your door unannounced particularly comforting?

The drug raid issue is tiring. Our drug laws reflect past and current policy. If we as a society want to change the policy, than let's do it (full disclosure: I am for legalizing at least some drugs). Attacking the police for enforcing laws seems to run counter to our Constitutional form of government.

 

[rambone]

David Fox said he was stunned to find this was no joke; police were actually looking to arrest him for illegal drug sales — even going through the family garden in search of illegal substances.

“They were kind of just rummaging around. Then they went into the garden and were kind of just sniffing around. We are growing parsley, basil and other stuff, but they were really interested in the basil,” she said.

FREEDOM, BABY!!

 

[rambone]

Nothing like a squad of federal troops raiding a private citizen's home over illegal contraband to start off the week. Did the DEA seek permission of the local sheriff before operating in his county? Hmm.

 

[88GT]

I'm all for jumping on tyranical acts by our government, but I don't understand the thought process that its still a tyranical act when its a case of mistaken identity that ends in little if any collateral damage. Especially when they apologize.

That would be the difference between you and me then. I don't forgive or excuse bad police work just because they got lucky and were able to keep themselves from shooting someone. (Do you realize that by your argument, you are excusing drunk driving if the driver manages to make it home without causing property damage or bodily injury?) The common thread behind all unrighteous shoots in the service of warrants is usually ****ty intel. The ends do not justify the means.

The drug raid issue is tiring. Our drug laws reflect past and current policy. If we as a society want to change the policy, than let's do it (full disclosure: I am for legalizing at least some drugs). Attacking the police for enforcing laws seems to run counter to our Constitutional form of government.

Whoa there Mr. Red Herring. Nobody is attacking the police for simply doing their job (okay, perhaps a few are, but not me). I'm attacking LE for the manner in which they do it. AND in some circumstances, extending the argument a bit to attack the public policy that makes these kinds of actions their jobs. I don't really expect any of them to have the cojones to choose their paycheck over their principles in these kinds of things. But I do expect just a little bit more effort in the intel department. It's not enough to get an address and assume it's correct. And it should NEVER be acceptable to execute a warrant (or even get the damn thing) on nothing more than the tip from an informant.

Sorry isn't good enough when it was only by chance/luck/karma/divine intervention that this particular scenario ended without bloodshed/life lost. Perhaps even a different set of men would have had a sorrier outcome.

I don't give free rein to individuals that can take my liberty at will without cause and suffer nothing in return.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

That would be the difference between you and me then. I don't forgive or excuse bad police work just because they got lucky and were able to keep themselves from shooting someone. (Do you realize that by your argument, you are excusing drunk driving if the driver manages to make it home without causing property damage or bodily injury?) The common thread behind all unrighteous shoots in the service of warrants is usually ****ty intel. The ends do not justify the means.



Whoa there Mr. Red Herring. Nobody is attacking the police for simply doing their job (okay, perhaps a few are, but not me). I'm attacking LE for the manner in which they do it. AND in some circumstances, extending the argument a bit to attack the public policy that makes these kinds of actions their jobs. I don't really expect any of them to have the cojones to choose their paycheck over their principles in these kinds of things. But I do expect just a little bit more effort in the intel department. It's not enough to get an address and assume it's correct. And it should NEVER be acceptable to execute a warrant (or even get the damn thing) on nothing more than the tip from an informant.

Sorry isn't good enough when it was only by chance/luck/karma/divine intervention that this particular scenario ended without bloodshed/life lost. Perhaps even a different set of men would have had a sorrier outcome.

I don't give free rein to individuals that can take my liberty at will without cause and suffer nothing in return.

Is this just you wanting to pick a fight and it's my turn?

Who said anything about forgiving or excusing bad police work? There's plenty of fail in the story. What happened on the ground while serving the warrant is not remotely among it. And you want to talk about red herrings? The drunk driving thing - yeah, that's it.

So on what plane in which reality does nobody equal a few but not me? And then in the very next sentence state you acutually are a part of the few? So which is it? Do you read your work collectively or just sentnce by sentence? Just trying to figure it all out so I know how to respond.

You weren't there. I wasn't there. We don't know what information was or wasn't used to swear out the warrant. So how bout we wait about a minute to see what the JBTs did wrong there, OK? But as far as the warrant service goes, it was probably as good as it could have been. Everything else as to karma / blah / blah / blah is emotional.

 

[Mike Elzinga]

The link reported no dead dogs, no terrorized children, no shot suspects, only a little sniffing in the herb garden. Yes they pointed a gun at the homeowner. Police do that when they serve warrants. But again, they apologized.

I have a tremendous respect for you, having read and agreed with a number of your previous posts, but I have trouble getting on board with this one. At the end of the day we are all free people (police officers included) and it is never ok for any law enforcement affiliate to point a gun at someone who has not committed a crime or threatened their safety. It is not ok to point your gun wherever you want "because its a search warrant" or any other trumped up crazy reason. If I am not allowed to point my gun at you, then you are not allowed to point your gun at me. LEO or not doesnt change this point. If someone comes to my law abiding home and points a gun at me, you wont get brownie points for apologizing.

I still have a great deal of respect for you and your opinion, but on this point, I disagree strongly.

 

[cordex]

I'm glad my name isn't John Smith.

 

[bobzilla]

Police aren't perfect. Police make mistakes. Police are people, therefore by default they are human. I guess not everyone can be as perfect as a lot of you here.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

I have a tremendous respect for you, having read and agreed with a number of your previous posts, but I have trouble getting on board with this one. At the end of the day we are all free people (police officers included) and it is never ok for any law enforcement affiliate to point a gun at someone who has not committed a crime or threatened their safety. It is not ok to point your gun wherever you want "because its a search warrant" or any other trumped up crazy reason. If I am not allowed to point my gun at you, then you are not allowed to point your gun at me. LEO or not doesnt change this point. If someone comes to my law abiding home and points a gun at me, you wont get brownie points for apologizing.

I still have a great deal of respect for you and your opinion, but on this point, I disagree strongly.

Fair enough. Consider the report.

“They [police] were in my front yard, my rear yard; they had my house surrounded. When I opened the door to see what was going on, there was an officer with a gun out not far from my stomach,” she said. “I am still shaking.”

Now in my reread it didn't say they officer was pointing the gun at her. Just that it was out.

But let's consider the circumstances. The police are serving a validly sworn warrant. They are outside the home gaggling about. Door opens on the home where the warrant is being served and homeowner exits door. Do the police on the ground know who is exiting and why they are exiting? I don't subscribe to the "officer safety" line of defense, but I think that anyone, LEOs included, have an absolute right to protect and defend themselves. You agreed to as much in your post.

There was no report of throwing the woman to the ground, cussing and screaming or anything else. In fact, all evidence to the contrary, as we further explore the report:

Officers informed Doreen they were looking for her 24-year-old son, David Fox, in connection with a large-scale heroin operation.

She said after much discussion, the officers realized the mistake and were apologetic to the family. The police were at the house about 15 minutes and at no point were rude or disrespectful, she added.

If I was exiting a home where a warrant was being served, I can probably assume that an LEO will have a gun pointed at me. I wouldn't like it a bit. I'd probably be pissed about it. I would hope they are not spastic and accidently shoot me. But again, looking at the totality of this report, it seems as though the police on the ground were respectful, receptive, listened, apologized for the inconvenience, and found the David Fox they were looking for.

 

[rambone]

I wonder if they were going to knock, or if they were waiting for someone to fetch the battering ram out of their urban warfare vehicle.

 

[Mike Elzinga]

Several things to address here, so lets hope I use the quote function right...

Now in my reread it didn't say they officer was pointing the gun at her. Just that it was out.

IMO this doesnt matter. I have a dear friend who spent 10 years as the head instructor for the 17th largest city in this country and what he told me was that "if you are justified in drawing your gun, you are justified in using it, and if you arent justified in using it, you shouldnt be drawing it".


But let's consider the circumstances. The police are serving a validly sworn warrant. They are outside the home gaggling about. Door opens on the home where the warrant is being served and homeowner exits door. Do the police on the ground know who is exiting and why they are exiting? I don't subscribe to the "officer safety" line of defense, but I think that anyone, LEOs included, have an absolute right to protect and defend themselves. You agreed to as much in your post.

I do 100% agree that police have the right to defend themselves, but if I walk out of my own house, no threat made and face down a gun barrel, thats not ok. IMO no police associate should ever take out there gun unless a threat has been made. I dont care if its a traffic stop or felony warrant.

There was no report of throwing the woman to the ground, cussing and screaming or anything else. In fact, all evidence to the contrary, as we further explore the report:

I didnt really intend to comment on this. Though I have seen legit instances of wild physical abuse of power, I think those truly are few and far between, and it didnt seem that happened here.


If I was exiting a home where a warrant was being served, I can probably assume that an LEO will have a gun pointed at me. I wouldn't like it a bit. I'd probably be pissed about it.I would hope they are not spastic and accidently shoot me. But again, looking at the totality of this report, it seems as though the police on the ground were respectful, receptive, listened, apologized for the inconvenience, and found the David Fox they were looking for.

Thats a lot of hope, way more than I am willing to count on. My dad used to tell me that "if you hope in one hand and shat in the other, I'd tell you which would fill up first".

I truly do feel for police and the difficult job they have. They dont have the option to make mistakes becuase that could cost an innocent life. This is why their job is hard and we support them. It is also something that every officer realizes when he takes the job. If officers get to wave their guns at whoever they want do whatever they want, the job isnt really that hard anymore. (I am not claiming that happened here, but IMO the climate is now that officers pull guns way too fast these days.)

I dont expect officers to be perfect, they are human just like us, but if they are allowed to point a gun at me when I havent mounted a threat, then shouldnt I be allowed to point one at them? We are all free men, presumed innocent until proven guilty. I DO expect them to be perfect when handling firearms, and I dont feel that is too much to ask.

These are all opinions, worth what ya paid for em.