Children handcuffed in police drug raid (and SOP of shooting the family dog)

Albany Times Union ^

[Sir Gawain]

Children handcuffed in police drug raid Dog also killed during bust; 18-year-old charged with misdemeanors, violation

By MIKE GOODWIN, Staff writer First published: Wednesday, September 20, 2006

SCHENECTADY -- A police strike team raided a woman's Prospect Street apartment and handcuffed her children and killed her dog early Tuesday in a $60 pot bust. The woman called it excessive force and a case of mistaken identity, but officers said they stormed the home for a good reason: One of her sons was selling marijuana there.

The Police Department's tactical squad knocked down the front door of the upstairs apartment at 110 Prospect St. and flooded into the apartment shortly after 6 a.m.

"I heard a big boom. My first reaction was to jump out of bed. We were trying to find where our kids were at and all of a sudden we had guns in our faces," said 40-year-old Anita Woodyear, who rents the second-floor flat.

During the ensuing chaos, police handcuffed two of the woman's children, Elijah Bradley, 11, and 12-year-old Victoria Perez, and shot at her dog in the kitchen before killing it in the bathroom, Woodyear said.

"That seems like an awful lot of firepower for marijuana," said Fred Clark of the Schenectady chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. "That's like spending $125,000 for $5."

Woodyear said she suspected police had intended to search a neighboring home, but had the wrong address on the search warrant. Neighbors said they suspect illicit drugs are dealt at other homes on the block.

"No apology, no 'sorry about your dog,' " she said.

But police said they have no reason to apologize. They said they raided the house because Woodyear's 18-year-old son, Israel M. Bradley, sold three plastic bags of marijuana there for $40 on Sept. 15. They allege he sold two other bags of marijuana in the house for $20 on Aug. 28, they said.

In addition, police said Bradley was carrying marijuana in the home on Sept. 1.

"We had the absolute right house. We had the absolute right target," said Assistant Chief Michael Seber.

Police said Bradley was one of several drug dealers they have under investigation on Prospect Street.

"The whole street is a mess right now. We'll be back," Seber said.

Bradley was arrested and charged with misdemeanor counts of criminal sale of marijuana, an offense punishable by up to one year in jail. He was also charged with unlawfully possessing marijuana, a violation.

Police Lt. Peter Frisoni said Bradley admitted he sold from the apartment in a statement to investigators after the raid.

"The moral of the story is: If you don't want officers barging into your house with their guns drawn, don't let drug dealers stay with you and deal drugs out of your apartment," Frisoni said.

Woodyear said she is appalled about the way her children were treated -- and said her 12-year-old daughter was hit with pepper spray.

The dog, a pit bull terrier named Precious, urinated on the floor in fear and tried to run from the police before it was killed, Woodyear said.

Police said the animal was aggressive and left them no choice but to shoot.

Elijah Bradley said he awoke to find armed men in his home. "They had the shotgun in my face," the 11-year-old said. "I punched at him. I didn't know who he was."

Police said they had reason to have weapons drawn. Their search warrant noted that among the things they planned to search for were firearms, although no handguns were found.

The NAACP has previously criticized how police conduct raids, most notably during an incident earlier this decade when a Hamilton Hill girl was held at gunpoint and handcuffed after her mother agreed to allow police to search their home for an armed man. The family later sued the city, but the jury awarded no damages. But Paul DerOhannesian, a defense attorney and former Albany County prosecutor, said such a response may have been warranted if police believed there were guns in the house.

"This type of search warrant execution can be very dangerous from a law enforcement point of view," he said.

"You're going to have a heightened sense or need for security for officer safety. You literally have no idea what you're walking into."

[takenoprisoner]

"Let's agree to disagree and build the bridge here, how's that?"

Fair enough, yet at the same time nothing less than I would accept from a true fellow conservative.

Cheers

[stultorum]

Excellent police work.

[William Terrell]

Experiencing life shouldn't include the illegal use of drugs, alchohol, or any other substance that will alter your personality.

Why not?

[takenoprisoner]

hey no problem. It was just my mood at the time having been so disappointed at some of the responses here. I figured it must be satire, but not being familiar with you nor your style, I sought some confirmation.

thanks

[William Terrell]

Good. I thought you were being sarcastic.

[phoenix0468]

Why Not? Are you serious?

[spinestein]

[But who are you?]



Apparently I'm a moonbat who just flew in for the weekend. There's a picture of me on post#379. phoenix0468 took it as I was coming in for a landing over his house.

[phoenix0468]

"Darn right. We should also not be eating fatty, sugary, oily, spicy or other bad foods which tend to degrade our bodies and shorten our lives, and engaging in activities which expose ourselves to nature unprotected is completely out of line. I propose we make ALL of it illegal right away."

Well spinestein, when you reply with crap like this what else am I supposed to think? You may be replying sarcastically, but replying to a sensible question with sarcasm usually makes you look a bit moonbatty. Or is that moonbattish, moonbatter, moonbatton, heck whatever. You take a nice pick.

[phoenix0468]

"Darn right. We should also not be eating fatty, sugary, oily, spicy or other bad foods which tend to degrade our bodies and shorten our lives, and engaging in activities which expose ourselves to nature unprotected is completely out of line. I propose we make ALL of it illegal right away."

Well spinestein, when you reply with crap like this what else am I supposed to think? You may be replying sarcastically, but replying to a sensible question with sarcasm usually makes you look a bit moonbatty. Or is that moonbattish, moonbatter, moonbatton, heck whatever. You take a nice pick.

[takenoprisoner]

I believe it to be satire. It's a style some responders use here. Not knowing redcloak nor his/her style, I was was caught off guard with his/her post.

My first thought of redcloak was that he/she was a raving manical lunatic. That is because he/she was that good in their prose...especially if you were unfamiliar with them and their style. But then, I thought better of it thinking it must be satire but still sought confirmation.

Bottomline, it could be a mistake to perceive spinestein as "moonbatty." The trick here is to get to know your adversary before you make judgments you may later regret.

Then, once you began to really know them, and you still find them moonbatty, then it's game on.

[phoenix0468]

good idea, I'll take it to heart. I did have a "back and forth" before I posted the bat though. Might have benefitted with additional communication though. Did you see his twin?

[mugs99]

I still think that it has more to do with the causes I stated earlier.

The "causes" you stated earlier have always been with us. If you could wave a magic wand and make all drugs disappear the Al Swearingens of the world would still be with us.

Drug prohibition has created the black market that is wreaking havoc on our culture. This is identical to alcohol prohibition.
.

[takenoprisoner]

"Did you see his twin?"

No, but I sense you are going to show me.

[mugs99]

Are you saying that there shouldn't be a prohibition against selling marijuana to minors??

Of course not. Are you saying there should be a prohibtion against selling to majors?
.

[mugs99]

Is this redcloak character for real or just forgot to sarc/off?

Lol!
Fire up the gas chambers!
I think he did a great shock and awe!
Probably didn't think the /s was needed.
.

[phoenix0468]

Well, as long as you ask.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1710990/posts?page=40#40

[takenoprisoner]

Well not knowing redcloak I was one of those caught up in the shock and awe!

At least now I am LOL at myself and him/her. You know what they say, fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. So I shant be fooled again. LOL

[spinestein]

Then let me be 100% serious in this post since less than that amount is obviously unwelcome.

You posted: [Experiencing life shouldn't include the illegal use of drugs, alchohol, or any other substance that will alter your personality.]


What specifically is this judgment based on? You used the qualifier "illegal" in your statement and I'm curious as to whether you would still agree with the statement if that word were removed. Since what is legal and illegal to ingest tends to change over time, with once acceptable substances becoming prohibited and vice versa, it seems reasonable to question the wisdom of making moral judgments about these behaviors based on their legal standing, although there is a school of thought which contends that all illegal behavior must be morally wrong.

Setting aside both the morality and legality of the issue for a moment and only considering the practicality of drug use, there is the unfortunate complication that drugs are different from each other in type and amount of effect on people and making one statement of judgment about all of them is meaningless. Caffeine is a naturally occurring drug found in small quantities in coffee and tea and many people ingest it for the feeling it gives. Same thing for nicotine in tobacco and also for THC in marijuana. It's possible to concentrate any of these three substances and ingest them, and doing so with any of them will alter your thinking process in different ways. On a personal note, I never use any of the three. These drugs are usually judged very differently, with caffeine being universally accepted and nicotine and THC being mostly condemned, though the effect of any of them upon a person's behavior is negligible given moderate use and nearly all people are capable of using these drugs over a lifetime without hazard.

It's evident that moderate alcohol use affects people at least as much as these other drugs, and in larger quantities it radically alters behavior. On another personal note, I regularly use alcohol but always in modest quantities which would not significantly affect my behavior or mental ability. It hardly needs to be mentioned that some drugs like cocaine or heroin or methamphetamine exist at the other end of the spectrum, resulting in rapid physical addiction and self destruction.

Many reasonable people would disagree with your statement, at least in part; life is to be experienced by partaking of it, and altering one's state of mind, mood or emotion is inherent to such diverse experiences as eating, physically exercising, competing with others athletically, engaging in vigorous conversation, having sex, playing music, and ingesting naturally occurring stimulants. Most people sometimes even combine two or more of these activities at once.

I would be interested to hear what reasons you have for judging why people shouldn't include the modest use of certain drugs as a normal and healthy part of experiencing life.

[takenoprisoner]

I don't quite understand the relationship of spinestein to the He Brew coffee shop? But I do know one thing, in my time in the Marines it sure as heck wasn't coffee we sought in our leisure time. I guess times have changed.

[mugs99]

At least now I am LOL at myself and him/her.

Lol...had me laughing from the gate!
Good to hear you're laughing about it...It sure did put the nanny staters in their place!
.