Newton County Sheriff proposes RANDOM HOUSE-TO-HOUSE SEARCHES

[Chase515]

I liked it!

I won't like it. Most of the posts seem to tread the line of advocating violence very closely.

 

[tv1217]

Someone tell him that his mustache is too big, please.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Hello thank you for linking to my article on SmArgus.com

As it relates to the legal ramifications of this Indiana Supreme Court ruling, my analysis was validated by several law enforcement sources and a Constitutional attorney. Supreme Court Justice David in writing the MAJORITY opinion did so in a manner that went outside the matters presented in BARNES v. STATE of INDIANA.

When he wrote "MODERN" legalese for (post-PATRIOT-Act) jurisprudence that Hoosiers may not resist UNLAWFUL entry, with the stroke of a pen he decreed the ability for law enforcement to conduct random house to house searches.

In order to appreciate the full gravity of the ruling, we must understand exactly what UNLAWFUL ENTRY means in the legal sense.Telephone any police chief and ask what does UNLAWFUL ENTRY MEAN; you will get an answer that states an UNLAWFUL ENTRY is any search of PRIVATE PROPERTY without PROBABLE CAUSE or WARRANT.

Therefore if neither PROBABLE CAUSE nor a WARRANT must be issued, it is left to the arbitrary whims of the department or officer on the scene.

Further as it relates to the inferences that this story is phony, all I can offer is that I have been publishing for 3 years, in that time never once have any of my articles ever received a LIBEL DEMAND RETRACTION LETTER from the facts presented therein.

Furthermore, Mike Church who retained my services as a Contributing Editor & Publisher, would not risk Libel litigation (nor his contract with Sirius/XM) by allowing libelous news reports to be published anywhere on his site which directly tied to the Sirius/XM show. (The article was originally drafted for MikeChurch.com where it also currently resides.)

Thus, you have my word as the author that the following is all true:

a.) I telephoned the Newton County Sheriff's Department on May 16th, 2011 and asked his secretary to speak with Sheriff Hartman since he as Sheriff is the highest-constitutionally-elected law enforcement officer in the state.

b.) Sheriff Hartman was asked if UNLAWFUL entry by law enforcement means entry without PROBABLE CAUSE or WARRANT. He indicated that is the definition of UNLAWFUL ENTRY.

c.) I then asked the Sheriff if he was familiar with the BARNES v. STATE of INDIANA ruling by the Indiana Supreme Court, to which he replied "yes."

c.) When asked what would then stop police from conducting random searches, he indicated to me that he would "follow the law as decided by the Indiana Supreme Court."

d.) I then asked again if this meant he felt he could conduct random searches without Probable Cause or warrant to which he replied, "if the Supreme Court has said Hoosiers cannot resist, I follow the law. If that means we can conduct random searches then we will if needed"

e.) Sheriff Hartman was then asked about whether he felt his oath to the Indiana State Constitution Section 11. was superior to the Indiana Supreme Court ruling to which he responded in a annoyed fashion, "Ma'am, I have already told you twice, if the supreme court says Hoosier cannot resist, then that is the law."

f.) I then asked if he saw any benefit to conducting Random Searches, to which he replied, "the people would be happy to have random searches if it means the capture of a criminal."

I thanked him for his time we hung up the telephone and utterly astounded at what he told me, immediately began to draft the article.

Whoa, that's pretty damning. I sincerely appreciate you showing up and clearing up the confusion. I retract my questioning of the source material. Kudos to you a rep'd.

 

[hornadylnl]

Mike Church for President!

 

[radonc73]

High tide floats all ship right?

 

[Bill of Rights]

From the sound of it, the sheriff fails to grasp the concept that because the court said he CAN do it does not mean that he SHOULD.

In the same vein, this sheriff CAN keep his job in the next election...

Blessings,
Bill

 

[crc]

Don Hartman Sr., Sheriff of Newton County, Indiana, proposed that random house-to-house searches will now be possible under recent Supreme Court ruling, and useful for squashing what remains of liberty in America.

IN Sheriff: If We Need to Conduct RANDOM HOUSE to HOUSE Searches We Will

"Seig heil, b****es."
- Don Hartman, Sr.​

Remove Newton County Sheriff Don Hartman Sr.
Remove Newton County Sheriff Don Hartman Sr. | Facebook

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

maybe we shouldnt send in our paramilitary SWAT team in to arrest the guy for a joint. the size and scope of many police departments have swelled to an alarming rate in this country. its unnaturaly fueled by federal dollars. .

This ^^ .

WAY TOO MANY of our podunk , BFE , Mayberry type town police / sheriff departments are becoming militarized using federal tax dollars to buy up surplus military equipment at DRMO auctions .

 

[2A_Tom]

melen,
The court already ruled. They already said that an illegal search is illegal. They rule against police doing stupid/illegal things all the time and award lots of taxpayer money to the victims of the illegal police actions.

So we have to pay for the home invasion then we have to pay both sides of the trial then if they decide that they did wrong we have to pay us for their misconduct.

That makes perfect sense!

 

[semperfi211]

http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#

Jeff Drinski

Don't believe what you see on the internet until it is confirmed. I'm going to verify "exactly" what the sheriff said tomorrow by listening to a recording of the conversation. I guarantee there will be no random searches in Newton County and that he did not say there would be.



I just got this from the facebook page remove sheriff Hartman. Jeff Drinski is the Newton County prosecutor.

 

[serpicostraight]

Jeff Drinski

Don't believe what you see on the internet until it is confirmed. I'm going to verify "exactly" what the sheriff said tomorrow by listening to a recording of the conversation. I guarantee there will be no random searches in Newton County and that he did not say there would be.



I just got this from the facebook page remove sheriff Hartman. Jeff Drinski is the Newton County prosecutor.

theres a good source. the county prosecutor? yea ill take his word for it.

 

[Allison_Bricker]

Yep the Newton County Good Ole Boys are sending the Prosecutor after me. Bring it on STATISTS, Tyranny like Hell is not easily conquered.

Nice thing about my report, it has spread far and wide. Received several emails from publishers today who indicated they telephoned the Newton County Sheriff today and that the Department would NOT deny or offer any further comment.

 

[PatriotPride]

Yep the Newton County Good Ole Boys are sending the Prosecutor after me. Bring it on STATISTS, Tyranny like Hell is not easily conquered.

Nice thing about my report, it has spread far and wide. Received several emails from publishers today who indicated they telephoned the Newton County Sheriff today and that the Department would NOT deny or offer any further comment.

Let them come. Appears to me that you are good to go. Good luck and thanks for posting! Please keep us updated.

 

[Allison_Bricker]

Apparently me being a newbie here on the message-boards prevents me from responding to a message so please forgive, my response on the thread...

Dear SerpicoStraight,

Thank you very much for you offer of support, I will definitely keep you in mind. My father was a truck driver all of his life, and his wisdom on the best greasy spoons to stop in and eat, still serves me well on my own little road trips.

So also, thank you for being out there on the road, bringing all of us the modern conveniences and store goods, we sometimes seem to take for granted.

Sincerely,

Allison

 

[Allison_Bricker]

Looks like the Newton County Prosecutor has a history of being just a gneral THUG, a.k.a typical government type.

[

JASPER COUNTY — On April 14, Jasper County Prosecuting Attorney Kathryn O’Neall filed an affidavit for probable cause charging Kentland Attorney and Republican candidate for Newton County Prosecutor Jeff Drinski with Disorderly Conduct, a Class B misdemeanor.

newsbug.info|News|Sports|Monticello|Rensselaer|Watseka|DeMotte|Hoopeston|Kentland|Attica|Williamsport|sports|Bombers|Indians|Oracles|Cavaliers| > Newton County Enterprise > Local News > Candidate for Prosecuting Attorney charged with Disorderly Condu

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

I left a comment on the facebook page... I'm not sure how the prosecutor can say that he "guarantees that that's not what was said". And then says that he's going to listen to the tape? How can you"guarantee" it BEFORE you've listened.... Saying "I DOUBT that he'd really say something like that" is one thing - but that's not what he's saying.

Here's the text of my note:

Mr. Drinski - sir how can you "guarantee" the contents of something which you have not heard? I agree that if the sheriff was misquoted he is owed a bigtime apology. That said, perhaps since you are listening to the tape of the conversation, you would care to make it public? Then we the people can judge for ourselves the position that the sheriff is taking. If this is much ado about nothing, then it will quickly blow over and the author of the article will lose all credibility, etc. If not, the you will see money pouring in from all OVER the state to unseat the sheriff and all who support him. Yourself included.

Allison - You wouldn't happen to have recorded the conversation, would you?

That would put a lot of the "he said, she said" crap to rest.

 

[Allison_Bricker]

I'm not sure how the prosecutor can say that he "guarantees that that's not what was said". And then says that he's going to listen to the tape?

He guarantees it because he worked for the Department. I look forward to investigating the "audio file".


Turns out Prosecutor Jeff Drinski is a FORMER Deputy Sheriff of the Newton County Sheriff's Department. He shot and killed a suspect was exonerated under self-defense by US 7th Circuit., then went to practice law.

PLAKAS v. DRINSKI
19 F3d 1143 Plakas v. Drinski | OpenJurist

He then was charged with Class B Misdemeanor for Disorderly Conduct, after he and his brother punched a man in the face.

He ended up pleading out to "Diversion Agreement"

Candidate for Prosecuting Attorney charged with Disorderly Conduct
newsbug.info|News|Sports|Monticello|Rensselaer|Watseka|DeMotte|Hoopeston|Kentland|Attica|Williamsport|sports|Bombers|Indians|Oracles|Cavaliers| > Newton County Enterprise > Local News > Candidate for Prosecuting Attorney charged with Disorderly Condu

Chronological Case Summary STATE v. DRINSKI
https://mycase.in.gov/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=7114374

 

[Rookie]

And this guy is a prosecutor? Kinda like letting the prisoner hold the keys to a prison.

 

[Allison_Bricker]

Allison - You wouldn't happen to have recorded the conversation, would you?

No, when it is an on the fly interview I use the journalistic standard of long-hand notes and :attribution.

I am confident that even if they have an unedited audio file, my notes will be shown to be correct.

The worst thing they could do would be to try to release an edited file.

My tech-nerdiness runs deep.

 

[rambone]

Allison, thank you for exposing this guy. Keep up the good work.