A couple of cops in uniforms when there is $100,000 worth of drugs involved?
Knocking on the door is a bit redundant when there is someone inside screaming about you being out there.
Trust me, if SWAT starts up my front walk, guns at the ready, my wife will probably start screaming too.
Yea, I can't blame the mother-in-law for screaming. In an ideal world she would just react calmly since she knew they had done nothing wrong. In an ideal world we wouldn't have people abusing drugs (of course the definition of abuse is up for debate), and wouldn't have criminals that are willing to kill others for $100,000.
We don't live in an ideal world. Occasionally what are reasonable decisions with what you know at the time lead to really bad situations.
But try and give a rational argument about what they should have done differently given what they knew at the time, rather than an emotional argument based on the fact that such a thing could also happen to you, me, or any of us?
When the evidence shows probable cause that they are dealing with what very well may be a dangerous criminal despite outward appearances, what should they do?
I've heard people say they should have waited and performed a more through investigation, but that's not really all that reasonable when they had just helped complete the delivery of 32 pounds of pot.
In an ideal situation none of the officers surrounding the place would have been seen before everyone was in place, and they could have knocked on the door and presented them with the warrant, and if no one freaked out it could have gone smoothly.
That is unfortunately not what happened, and in reality you really can't always avoid someone looking out the window at the wrong time and reacting with fear.
Also if you have less officers in less protective gear you are more likely to have the dogs getting shot, not less. Because if the officers think they are going into a dangerous situation and there aren't people to watch their back while they are dealing with an aggressive dog, they are going to have to remove the threat of the dog so they can deal with other threats.
A dog is less of a threat to a team with protective gear than one or two plainclothes officers that have the human occupants to deal with as well. The more of a threat dogs and suspects pose the more likely you are to have to use deadly force. A stronger team, gives the police more options.
The question is if they made reasonable choices considering the options they had.
In regards to going in. In hindsight not the best option, but not an unreasonable one with what they knew at the time.
Was shooting the dogs a reasonable option? I'm far less sure about that one. The evidence may well show that was not a reasonable option. If that is the case, then the officers need to be held accountable.
My sympathies go out to the mayor's family. They should not have had to go through this. However, that does not necessarily mean that the officers were wrong to have gone in when they did. Making what is the correct choice with the limited information you have doesn't guarantee desirable results, and waiting to get more information is also a choice that may not produce desirable results.
Yes. That's what their warrant authorized.
give a rational argument about what they should have done differently given what they knew at the time
They knew at the time that their warrant was to knock on the door and wait for the occupants to admit them. (They also knew this at the time when they perjured themselves about it, but that's a separate crime.)
You think she was screaming because she thought they were cops?
She was screaming because she saw unidentifiable men with guns. Do you think a completely innocent person should have assumed they were cops?
Why did they complete the delivery before performing more thorough investigation? And why not perform the search at the time of the delivery?