Ahh, but the official excuse would be “we didn’t know a person with dementia lacks the mental caacity to give consent.”
After all, not too long ago, Seattle police claimed they had no idea that tasering a pregnant woman is wrong. (see Malaika Brooks).
The same excuse will be used again....
It's even simpler. The official excuse would be "we didn't know that this person has dementia and/or other issues that could prevent them from giving consent. We aren't doctors."
Well, at least the police now has a simple way to search occupied residences. Arrest everyone who objects, one by one, for "interference with investigation" or for "disturbing the peace", until one of those who remain surrenders and allows the search.
In this case the guy who was arrested attracts no sympathy. But that's always how new laws and rulings are installed - on test cases that are open and shut, when nobody can defend the bad guy. Shortly after the same legal principle is used against everyone else.
True, they would likely still come in, but hopefully “fruit of poisonous tree” would apply. But in the interim, it costs the plaintiff a ton of time and money. THAT’s what REALLY hacks me off. There needs to be equitable compensation for the cost in time and money for such egregious acts!