Posted on 11/27/2006 10:12:03 AM PST by kiriath_jearim
The proliferation of SWAT teams, police militarization, and the Drug War have given rise to a dramatic increase in the number of "no-knock" or "quick-knock" raids on suspected drug offenders. Because these raids are often conducted based on tips from notoriously unreliable confidential informants, police sometimes conduct SWAT-style raids on the wrong home, or on the homes of nonviolent, misdemeanor drug users. Such highly-volatile, overly confrontational tactics are bad enough when no one is hurt -- it's difficult to imagine the terror an innocent suspect or family faces when a SWAT team mistakenly breaks down their door in the middle of the night.
But even more disturbing are the number of times such "wrong door" raids unnecessarily lead to the injury or death of suspects, bystanders, and police officers. Defenders of SWAT teams and paramilitary tactics say such incidents are isolated and rare. The map below aims to refute that notion.
http://www.cato.org/raidmap/#
How To Use This Map:
Click on each marker on the map for a description of the incident and sources. Markers are precise in cases where the address of an incident was reported. Where media reports indicate only a town or neighborhood, markers are located at the closest post office, city hall, or landmark. Incident descriptions and outcomes are kept as current as possible.
Other map features:
--Using the "plus" and "minus" buttons in the map's upper left-hand corner, users can zoom in on the map to street-level, as well as switch between street map and satellite views. In some large metropolitan areas, there are so many incidents in such close proximity that they tend to overlap unless viewed on a small scale (try zooming in on New York City, for example).
--Users may isolate the incidents by type by clicking on the colored markers in the key (see only "death of an innocent" markers, for example).
--The search function just below the map produces printable descriptions of the raids plotted on the map, and is sortable by state, year, and type of incident.
"Radley Balko Radley Balko Radley Balko"
Who wrote this again?
Maybe it's just me, but busting in to any residence, guns drawn without notice, seems to be forcing a life or death situation where there might otherwise not be one.
I'm not saying that it shouldn't ever be done, but I think there are life or death situations that are artificially created by this tactic and there needs to be more common sense applied on the front end.
Some of those on Swat view it as a good paying job advancement.
The problem is that these people do not have any psychological training and they turn into power abusing lunatics. (see also kerry "do you know who i am.")
When you force your way into someones home unannounced, without a life threatening situation, you deserve to be shot.
Mook Bark
This kind of concern is right behind "It's all Bush's fault" as a whacko fake concern in the scheme of things.
How many SWAT Team "Mistakes" have there ever been in recorded history? Name one. After that, tell: "SO WHAT?"
Let's concentrate on Criminals and the certain threat they are to innocent people...not the law-enforcement heros that protect law abiding citizens.
>>Maybe it's just me, but busting in to any residence, guns drawn without notice, seems to be forcing a life or death situation where there might otherwise not be one.
I'm not saying that it shouldn't ever be done, but I think there are life or death situations that are artificially created by this tactic and there needs to be more common sense applied on the front end.<<
Y'mean like Waco?
From Cato's map:
Alberta Spruill.
May 16, 2003—NY
On May 16, 2003, a dozen New York City police officers storm an apartment building in Harlem on a no-knock warrant. They're acting on a tip from a confidential informant, who told them a convicted felon was dealing drugs and guns from the sixth floor.
There is no felon. The only resident in the building is Alberta Spruill, described by friends as a "devout churchgoer." Before entering the apartment, police deploy a flashbang grenade. The blinding, deafening explosion stuns the 57 year-old city worker, who then slips into cardiac arrest. She dies two hours later.
A police investigation would later find that the drug dealer the raid team was looking for had been arrested days earlier. He couldn't possibly have been at Spruill's apartment because he was in custody. The officers who conducted the raid did no investigation to corroborate the informant's tip. A police source told the New York Daily News that the informant in the Spruill case had offered police tips on several occasions, none of which had led to an arrest. His record was so poor, in fact, that he was due to be dropped from the city's informant list.
Nevertheless, his tip on the ex-con in Spruill's building was taken to the Manhattan district attorney's office, who approved of the application for a no-knock entry. It was then taken to a judge, who issued the warrant resulting in Spruill's death. From tip to raid, the entire "investigation" and execution were over in a matter of hours.
Spruill's death triggered an outpouring of outrage and emotion in New York and inspired dozens of victims of botched drug raids, previously afraid to tell their stories, to come forward.
Still, the number of real, tangible reforms to result from the raid were few. Though the number of no-knocks in New York has by most indications declined, there's still no real oversight or transparency in how they're granted and carried out. And victims of botched raids still have no real recourse, other than to hope the media gets hold of their story.
Sources:
Austin Fenner, Maki Becker, and Michelle McPhee, "Cops' Tragic Grenade Raid; Storm wrong apt., woman dies," New York Daily News, May 17, 2003, p.3.
William K. Rashbaum, "Report by police outlines mistakes in ill-fated raid," New York Times, May 31, 2003, p. A1.
Fernanda Santos and Patrice O'Shaughnessy, "Snitch had shaky rep," New York Daily News, May 18, 2003.
Leonard Levitt, "Focus on Kelly, Race After Raid," Newsday, May 19, 2003, p. A2.
"Name one."
Alberto Sepulveda.
'How many SWAT Team "Mistakes" have there ever been in recorded history? Name one.'
Just click on Death of an Innocent and click submit.
'Let's concentrate on Criminals and the certain threat they are to innocent people...not the law-enforcement heros that protect law abiding citizens.'
A badge does not a hero make.
They don't even have a category for 'wrong address', do they?
Just because a suspect turns out to be innocent, it doesn't mean the raid wasn't justified. That's what juries are for.
Their categories.
Death of an innocent.
Death or injury of a police officer.
Death of a nonviolent offender.
Raid on an innocent suspect.
Other examples of paramilitary police excess.
Unnecessary raids on doctors and sick people.
I would rather us concentrate on doing away with "Law Enforcement Officers", and returning to "Peace Officers".
When you break into an innocents house you become a criminal. No knock warrants should be reserved solely for cases where lives are endangered. If you have a life threatening emergency, a violent felony in progress or a murderer at large then peoples rights to privacy are overruled by the need to protect life. If that's not the case however, then there is no good reason to forcibly enter someone's home unannounced. Police can surround the house, knock on the door, present their warrant and enforce the law without behaving like the Gestapo. If the suspect refuses to answer the door, then you break it down, but not until then.
The current drive for gun-owner friendly legislation by the NRA is the "Castle Doctrine". These laws grant legal residents of a dwelling the explicit right to resist a home invasion with all necessary force, including lethal. I believe the NRA has successfully lobbied some twelve states to adopt a form of this legislation with more states signing on every day. It will be interesting to see the result when "no knock" meets "Castle Doctrine" head on. It;s only a matter of time...
Regards,
GtG
Let's concentrate on Criminals and the certain threat they are to innocent people...not the law-enforcement heros that protect law abiding citizens.
I'd rather that we fought crime by giving criminals very long sentences with no possibility of parole than by slowly eroding our civil rights. I'm guessing that if the court system had done it's job in the first place that 75% of the criminals you deal with would still be behind bars.
I believe you when you say that you and your team do a professional job and I'd like to thank you for helping to keep myself and my family safe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.