Skip to comments.Ind. Sheriff: If We Need to Conduct RANDOM HOUSE to HOUSE Searches We Will
Posted on 05/20/2011 11:08:50 AM PDT by Michael Barnes
ROWN POINT, Ind. According to Newton County Sheriff, Don Hartman Sr., random house to house searches are now possible and could be helpful following the Barnes v. STATE of INDIANA Supreme Court ruling issued on May 12th, 2011. When asked three separate times due to the astounding callousness as it relates to trampling the inherent natural rights of Americans, he emphatically indicated that he would use random house to house checks, adding he felt people will welcome random searches if it means capturing a criminal. Speaking under the condition of anonymity, a local city Police Chief with 30 years experience in law enforcement directly contradicted the Newton County Sheriffs blatant disregard for privacy & liberty, stating that as an American first, such an action is unconscionable and that his allegiance is to the Indiana and federal Constitutions respectively. However, he also concurred that the ruling does now allow for police to randomly search homes should a department be under order by state or federal officials or under a departments own accord. At this time we are still awaiting comments from several state offices. However, the spokesperson for the INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL took umbrage at what he referred to as large assumptions regarding police power and at this time has no comment. He did however indicate that should the INDIANA Attorney General, Greg Zoeller feel it necessary to make a statement, that this reporter would be included in the distribution of the release.
I stumlbed across this brief article. Not sure just how valid the source is, but I'm sure a freeper will know...
Give them an inch and they’ll take a light-year..................
Nothing to see here....hey, what’s Charlie Sheen up to these days??
It’s real all right!
The police are getting out of control shooting down innocent civilians (Tucson Las Vegas) and now this!
What I want to know is where does Daniels Stand on this?
The Barnes case does not allow random house to house searches. If this sherrif tries it he will discover that any evidence of criminality found would be forever suppressed as evidence at trial and the bad guy would get away.
Mod, delete? There was another thread on this.
Thuggish Jack booted police. Where is the NRA in Indiana?
Exactly. Saying that you cannot physically hinder a policeman from entering your house does not mean that you will be prosecuted for anything found in the entry itself.
No need to delet on my account! Seperate source anyway.
Remove Newton County Sheriff Don Hartman Sr.
Mine or his?.................8^)
Is this the Onion? It has to be...because this certainly can’t be happening in the USA.
Man, I don’t even know..I was hoping to post it and get what I thought would be debunking posts. Looks like this Sheriff could give a damn about liberty.
On May 16, 2011, I was contacted by a reporter of an internet radio station. Her question concerned a recent Indiana Supreme Court decision, allowing police officers to make random warrantless searches. I advised her that I was not clear on that particular ruling; she then asked how the Sheriffs Office conducted searches of residences. I informed her that searches were only conducted with a warrant, probable cause or when an officer is in hot pursuit. When questioned about the Supreme Court ruling, I advised her that as police officers, we enforce those laws set forth by our legislative branch. This reporter then asked about the violation of Constitutional Rights. This State Supreme Court ruling in my opinion cannot override our U.S. Constitutional Rights and Im sure this state ruling will be revisited.
When I was asked about my thoughts on random searches and how people would react, I gave her the scenario of looking for a criminal or escapee. I advised her that if people were aware of this situation, they would gladly let you search a detached garage, outbuilding, etc., if it meant keeping them safe, but this would only be after securing permission.
This court ruling is just open for lawsuits if a police officer would attempt a random search without due cause. Somewhere in this conversation things were definitely taken out of context. I'm now quoted as saying the Sheriff's Office will be conducting random house to house searches.
I want the citizens of Newton County to rest assured that no member of the Newton County Sheriffs Office will enter the property of another person without first having a warrant or probable cause to do so. I strongly stand behind my oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America, as well as that of the State of Indiana.
Chief might be on our side by making the point real.
Nice find...many thanks.
Was this thug elected to office?
Under what party?
“Chief might be on our side by making the point real.”
That was actually one of my first thoughts. See also NELSON111’s comment above yours, Raycpa.
Sometimes you get what you asked for and REALLY REGRET IT. This will result in the discovery of every low-life deadbeat and illegal immigrant the legal system doesn't want to touch. Unless they engage in a profitable criminal search spree, the localities will be so choked with law breakers (because everything is now illegal) that they won't be able to move.
Hell, why not just invite every local police department and local judge to your house with an official party invitation? Call it a "Lust for a Bust" party! Do an official invitation complete with an RSVP, and a sign up for who gets to search the wife's dresser where she keeps her vibrator and porn! The first ten to respond to the RSVP get to search the daughter's closets where it's rumored she keeps weed and dirty pictures of her and her boyfriend making inappropriate sexual contact.
What's going on in this country is so sad you can flip it to stay sane.
It's not real, see post 17.
I hope folks will be as quick to retract this as they were to spread it.
Now I have to ask is it true or is it a OH $#IT! I need to cover my A$$! retraction?
What happens to your goods when a “random house search” brings light-fingered officers into your home?
You won’t have any recourse if your jewelry, coins or valuables disappear.
why does this sheriff hate a book publisher?
why does this sheriff hate a book publisher?
Good luck butt hole...try that sh!t in Texas, and for sure in our neighborhood, "you're a dead man intruding!"
Given the lack of any citation by the original stuff I read on this, I would think the former. All I saw were blogs citing a talk radio show that had no tape or transcript of the guy actually saying that.
See post 17.
Please delete thread as story seems to be bogus!
Please delete thread as story seems to be bogus!
He's obviously "gone over" and cannot be trusted.
It's up to the state legislature to remove him ~ and I would hope that happens quite soon.
They don’t need no kinda’ book publishers in Texas!
Wait til the “cops_can_do_no_wrong_and_how_dare_you_question_their_authority” contingent of JBT boot-lickers here at FR show up to defend this idiot sheriff.
The CPUSA? Perhaps the NDSAP?
The CJ was a MITCH DANIELS appointee.....so much for all the hoopla here about the worthlessRINO Mitchie-boy as a possible candidate for prez.
Check this out:
lol. Gosh you people are such voyeurs. Truth be told, I am writer by choice as my oratory skills are usually lost in my indignant exuberance for liberty.
Thus, coupled along with the fact that I cannot stand to hear myself recorded I will most likely stick with :Attribution.
Allison Bricker is the reporter cited in the Mike Church web link that started all this. She gives a lame-assed excuse for not recording the calls in question.
Which smells to high heaven to me.
Ross Perot also wanted to conduct door door searches to confiscate guns.
Hang on a second...
The original reporter may have *GROSSLY* misquoted/misrepresented the Sheriff.
The use case given was a suspect running into a neighborhood with cops in pursuit. Would the sheriff search for him and how?
After the original interview, the Sheriff made it *very* clear that he had been misquoted (at best). He stated that in the example given, his deputies would contact each home, explain the situation and REQUEST PERMISSION to search garages & outbuildings. He further stated that the recent, inflammatory court ruling would have NO impact on his commitment to defend & uphold the constitution.
Don’t be a gullible, knee-jerking rube and accept some internet reporter’s (with an undetermined agenda) unverified story at face value. Also, don’t take my word for it either — look it up yourself. I think you will come away with some serious questions for the interviewer (Bricker) just as I have.
I have heard of cases where the prosecutor tries to circumvent the “fruit of the poison tree” defense by pleading that the “technicality” or “minor mistake” of the officer should not allow all the obviously illegal stuff they eventually found be thrown out.
They have had success, and, putting these two cases together eviscerates the 4th amendment. Check out some of the “Good faith” exceptions, or see where totally illegally found stuff CAN still be used against you, here:
It gets worse - check the Facebook post from Bricker as to why she doesn’t have any of this on tape - completely flippant. I guess Bricker has never heard that extraordinary charges require extraordinary evidence - and she doens’t have jack in that department - but sure is milking the controversy she generated for all it is worth.
In looking at the facebook page demanding the sherrif be removed, all I can say is Bricker is a real nasty drama queen and shows all the hallmarks of someone who has completely warped what the sherrif said to pimp herself.
Okay, I won't/can't sue your butt if you intrude into my domicile (without a warrant, probable cause or in a clear and obvious 'hot pursuit') but I will shoot your arse if you take on my right to defend my family and property.
Trust me...things happen in the heat of the moment here in Texas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.