What mean read?
Me think is color of range flags.
And some Caddies.
Posted on 05/16/2011 8:40:02 PM PDT by wrastu
Read it again. The "reasonably belief" is whether force is necessary, not whether the entry is legal or illegal.
I’ve been trying to harness the energy of Eaker for years...
I cannot do so without a Flux Capacitor...Which hasn’t been invented yet...
They didn't even have cartridge casings in his day!
“Funny thing is, it’s the cops who get screwed over by the courts more than anyone else.”
You have a point there, but illegal entry is what it is. While I agree that the officer had probable cause, what if he didn’t? The judge @ the pooch on that one. Why should a citizen be punished for preventing a law from being broken as the judge claimed? And that same judge apparently was a defendent for Gitmo prisoners, right?
“Plus, I think there should be personal liability in cases of negligence that lead to illegal entries, for example.”
I think that a natural deterence is enough to stop most illegal entries. I’m sick of living in a sue-happy legitiious society. If a well intended policeman experiences a few warning shots now and then when he doesn’t have a warrant, why should he be sued on top?
Further, police would have less work if homes could actually be defended. I was told that if a burglar breaks into my house, I should run out of it before shooting him here in Virginia. [Hope that has changed.] It’s still that way in some states.
I can always use a good driver or loader.
I can always use a good driver or loader.
What mean read?
Me think is color of range flags.
And some Caddies.
Stay Safe !!!
Oh good. I know right where that is.
I expect he would have thought it a swell weapon with which private citizens could arm their privateers.
In which case he would have likely gone to jail and lost his job, like fellow Evansville P.D. officer Jason Henry.
“plant a little *flake* evidence”
Investigations should be digitally recorded from beginning to end.
The future good news will be that DNA testing could help expose planted fake evidence.
hard to say what they would have thought. remember that they were so afraid of traitors in their midst that they locked the doors to the congress and had guards outside with orders to kill anyone coming in or going out.
They would have feared anyone with too much power unchecked.
Safest place to live....what are the odds ..... T.S Garp !
Lmao !
He’s a marvel of reverse engineering if ever there was an a true Texan. Just stay clear of the pointy end.
I appreciate your input, thank you.
“What’s needed is to allow defense attorneys to put questions of warrant legitimacy before trial-court juries. Inform the jury in trial court that unless the state proves that a warrant was obtained and served 100% legitimately, the jury should not regard any evidence gained by the warrant in any manner detrimental to the defense.”
To me, truth is truth. Warrants are a means to an end. I think juries should only need to focus on what is true and what isn’t true. Suppression of evidence due to technicalities is for another trial or lawsuit IF the suspect is not guilty. That cuts through the tangle. I could care less if a scumbag isn’t given “due process”. But then planted “evidence” would be the next big problem. That’s when I throw up my hands. Any ideas?
“To be sure, a lot of jurors might convict someone using evidence they really shouldn’t have considered, but a lot of jurors would, with the right defense arguments, quite properly refuse to go along with some of what the police would call “probable cause”.”
Probable cause could be verified by flipping on a head-mounted digital camera/sound recording system. Some towns are already testing that on their own. [Thank God.]
“Presently, when police seek a warrant there’s no way for the intended target to cross-examine them and uncover information that may show that their “probable cause” is a sham. For example, if police get a warrant based upon the fact that drug activity was observed in a house two months ago, but fail to disclose to the warrant judge that the person who occupied the property then was evicted and someone else moved in, a judge might not quash any evidence stemming from such a warrant, but a jury might be loath to accept it (if nothing else, because it would show such sloppy investigation by the officers involved that their conduct on the case would be untrustworthy).”
Interesting. Once again, the concern of planted “evidence”.
How many murder suspects were framed or falsely accused? A lot right? [Based on DNA testing.]
The confusion originated from a lack of info given out on an HTML page. But the root problem isn’t the case itself, it’s the insane wording of that judge. And you’re right — if he’s a Gitmo defender, then the judge is most likely a nutcase.
Yes, GITMO + Lawschool = CR*P! and YIKES~
Jason Henry was NOT ON DUTY. The two cases have absolutely no similarity.
what ever ya need most, i'm UP...
Mises institute is reprinting it...that’s where I got it. Think it came to under 30 bucks with shipping.
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.