Couple plan to sue RCMP over 911 reaction

The Vancouver (Canada) Sun ^ | November 22, 2006 | Joanna Habdank

[Wallace T.]

Remember this occurred less than 50 miles from the U.S. border in the nation that most closely resembles our own. Canada does not have a Fourth Amendment, but it does have the English common law precedent that limits the powers of police of search and seizure. However, we Americans are far from safe from police abuse, and continued weakening of individual rights may lead to such an event on our side of the 49th Parallel. Already, non-police agents of the state, such as CPS social workers, claim the authority to enter homes without warrant to investigate "child abuse."

[samtheman]

New Mounty Motto:

All your houses are belong to us.

[KoRn]

ping

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

What a bunck of amateurs!

Ol' Janet could show these RCMP's a little something about controlling the masses.

[VeritatisSplendor]

We've had police show up three times over the last ten years or so (411 and 921-xxxx misdialed, one child experimenting) and they have never tried to come in but they insisted on coming over and speaking to us even when I stayed on the line after the misdial to explain.

Mrs VS

[Wallace T.]

The RCMP, like our FBI, used to be one of the finest law enforcement agencies in the world, with high professional standards. This incident would embarrass a rural sheriff's department.

[ZGuy]

She invited the problem.

It was explained to her why they needed to search the home -- a totally legitimate reason -- and she refused to allow the RCMP to do their job. If they had been in a hostage situation and she refused to allow the RCMP to search her house and then someone was murdered, she would have been the first to sue the RCMP for not saving them, I'd bet.

Now, if the RCMP used unnecessary force, and it looks like they did, that's a different issue worth pursuing. But the primary cause of the whole mess is simple - she screwed up.

[driftdiver]

"It was explained to her why they needed to search the home -- a totally legitimate reason -- and she refused to allow the RCMP to do their job."

A misdialed phone number is not adequate reason. Even if it were why were they jailed?

"But the primary cause of the whole mess is simple - she screwed up."

So a simple mistake is sufficient reason for the state to do anything they want? This looks remarkably similiar to the Soviets and other communist regimes.

[Wallace T.]

The Fourth Amendment and English common law have used probable cause as a standard for allowing police to enter a private home or other private property without a court issued warrant. How is misdialing a phone number meet the standard of probable cause, especially after the person who made the error explains her mistake?

[NonValueAdded]

On the flip side ... the police receive a 9-1-1 call that is a hang-up. They are assured that everything is OK, not to worry, just an innocent mistake. They buy it and the home invader has his way with the family for the three-day weekend, putting them through an unimaginable hell until he kills them all. When all this comes to light, the surviving relatives sue everyone involved and the press excoriates everyone from the operator who took the call and on up the chain to the governor.

The couple initiated the contact, however innocently, and therefore have to let it play out by the rules. Methinks the partner, being a lawyer, gave them too much lip and brought on a full-measured response. I'll also wager that our LEO readers can give plenty of examples where the female victim assured them that nothing was wrong, then he didn't mean it, and finally turn on the officers as they attempt an arrest.

Nope, what if my hypothetical homicidal maniac had her kid inside and she was sent out on the porch with instructions to get rid of the cops or the kid gets it? Plenty of reasons for the cops NOT to take her word for it in today's litigious society, north or south of the Canadian border. Perhaps the cops over-reacted and surely could have handled it better. But the couple has some culpability. And a lawyer got cracked ribs. How cool is that?

[AmishDude]

Her "partner"? What are they, an LLC?

[ZGuy]

I think that's what it comes down to, and apparently it is a judgement call by law enforcement. Her attitude/nervousness may have been such that the police thought there was a possibility that she was telling them they could not enter the house because she was being forced to do so by someone inside. The police can't know if she hung up by mistake or because a "bad guy" caught her on the phone and slammed it down on her as she was calling for help.

[Wallace T.]

Law enforcement with no restraint on its power is more dangerous than the criminal element is. The history of the last century is filled with out of control police agencies: the Soviet KGB, the Nazi Gestapo and SS, the East German Stasi, Castro's DGI, Red China's secret police, and their results, such as imprisonment without trial, torture (a small taste of which this couple received), slave labor and death camps. The history of freedom is parallel to placement of restraint on government agencies. Our own Bill of Rights was passed because the Founding Fathers remembered the abuse of traditional English liberties by the agents of the Crown.

Where no probable cause exists to believe a crime is being committed, the police need to back off. Not only police, but social workers, building inspectors, and numerous other government busybodies need to mind their own business. Those who would trade their liberty for security deserve neither.

[Wallace T.]

Their personal lives and their relationship with each other are not relevant to the matter.

[Kozak]

"I was sitting on the couch. They stuck a Taser in my face, threatening me with 50,000 volts," said Pierce, a well-known lawyer.

So there was a silver lining afterall...

[brazzaville]

Good morning.

A response to a 911 hang up used to be a popular reason for LEOs to enter without a warrant. I don't know if it still is.

Michael Frazier

[Anti-Bubba182]

".."I was sitting on the couch. They stuck a Taser in my face, threatening me with 50,000 volts," said Pierce, a well-known lawyer..."

I wonder if Pierce being, "A well-known lawyer" had anything to do with this? Ordinarily Police do not jump into that kind of trouble.

Misdial of 9-1-1 leads to arrest

"NEWS photo Cindy Goodman Marget Lieder checks damage to her home's front door after RCMP broke in to check the situation after she dialled 9-1-1 instead of 4-1-1."

[centurion316]

Well said. Beware someone from the government claiming to be interested in "protecting your safety". Tyranny together with the loss of your freedom and liberty are not far behind. Eternal vigilance against this sort of abuse is our only defense.

[Safetgiver]

said Pierce, a well-known lawyer......There it is. A set up for money.

[Churchillspirit]

Excellent perspective on this story.