Replies

I don't think there is a Constitutional problem with a no knock situation. Where the problem will happen is if and when the bad guys have a shootout with the police and one of them lives.
If, at 3:00am in the morning, the police knock down the door of my home by accident, they will have just under 10 seconds to find me before there is going to be a major problem. My alarm system will go off, and I can be awakened, up , and armed with a .223 w/night scope before my alarm horn ramps to full volume - it's happened. Someone is not going to live through the encounter because I am not going to wait and see who it is. Had they announced themselves and that they had a warrant, although annoyed at the mistake, I would let them in and we could correct it since I have no desire to engage LE in an armed conflict.
Lets take the situation back at the bad guys house: 3:00 am, the police break down the door and the bad guys are sitting around armed, in the back room of the house. Officer is shot and killed and bad guys are arrested and hauled to jail.
Court day where bad guys is on trial for murder and he gets off simply because he makes a successful self defense argument, after all, the scumbag had his three year old and wife asleep in the house and had no idea that it was the police who were entering. It makes no difference what the truth was, that is without a doubt - reasonable doubt as to the bad guys intentions in killing the officer.

While not (IMHO) a Constitutional issue, I believe no-knock warrant executions are very foolish and extremely dangerous.

In addition this statement is extremely troubling to me "Suppressing evidence is too high of a penalty, Scalia said, for errors in police searches. "
Since the police have immunity from prosecution the ONLY avenue to assure that the police observe the law is to simply make it useless not to. In this particular issue, would agree that just because they didn't knock first (assuming they did have a legally acquired warrant) is no reason to throw out the charges. However, as a general, broad viewpoint this gives LE the green light to do anything they please regardless of the law because the end justifies the means. I STRONGLY disagree!

Cordially,
GE

In addition this statement is extremely troubling to me "Suppressing evidence is too high of a penalty, Scalia said, for errors in police searches. " Since the police have immunity from prosecution the ONLY avenue to assure that the police observe the law is to simply make it useless not to. In this particular issue, would agree that just because they didn't knock first (assuming they did have a legally acquired warrant) is no reason to throw out the charges. However, as a general, broad viewpoint this gives LE the green light to do anything they please regardless of the law because the end justifies the means. I STRONGLY disagree!

I think there's a big difference between a good-faith error and LE abuse, etc.. In either case, people who have their door smashed in, hit with a flash-bang, etc. at the wrong address have a legitimate beef, and can successfully sue the responsible government agency. As a former LEO, I can assure you that mistakes like those are not taken lightly by their superiors.

If you were to defend your home against perceived intruders, especially if they were found to be at the wrong place, I seriously doubt that you'd have any legal problems to worry about. Plenty of other problems, but I doubt anybody would be throwing you in jail for it.

I agree with the ruling. Mistakes with no-knock warrants are clearly the exception, which is why they make great news stories. The overwhelming majority of the time, these are used effectively to take down bad guys.

However, as a general, broad viewpoint this gives LE the green light to do anything they please regardless of the law because the end justifies the means.

I believe this is an overreaction. LE never has the green light to do "anything they please". Yes, there are cops who get way out of control. They're a problem, and should be dealt with severely, IMO. But that's no reason to take a critical tool--no-knock warrants--out of the hands of the large number of good, honest, dedicated officers who simply want to nail bad guys before they have the chance to flush all the evidence.