SWAT attorney said video speaks for itself(Tucson shooting of Marine)

http://azstarnet.com/online/video/vmix_79f8c3e2-8804-11e0-a06f-001cc4c002e0.html

You gravely mischaracterized the video. The siren is running 0:29 to 0:38. The knock is at 0:41, with a mechanized voice in addition to human shouting. Entry at 0:58. Gunfire at 1:04. Seventeen to thirty seconds is plenty of time to call out, “Hold on, I’m coming.” Unless you’re busy getting your gun out, I suppose.

The warrant had been for 4 homes of a circle of drug dealers who were posing as law enforcement agents. Raids at previous homes turned up large wads of cash and drugs, confirming the validity of the warrant’s leads, if not their accuracy.

Was the marine in the circle? No drugs were found, but LEO-type body armor, an LEO-type rifle, an unusually large stash of cash, a border-patrol hat, and a framed picture of Jesus Malverde, the “patron saint” of drug dealers were found. Any one of these doesn’t mean much. All together, they still aren’t enough for a conviction without further evidence. But there’s hardly an absence of evidence that would prove government malfeasance. And Guerena was crouched, pointing the LEO rifle at them.

“They could have moved the body.” The in the house was not the SWAT team, but a remote-control robot, used to determine if there was anyone else who posed a threat. And the wife did not make that allegation.

“The safety was still on.” They’d move the body but not take the safety off? How does that help Guerena’s case? He was going to lie in ambush for home invaders with the safety on? He was trying to have a standoff against an entire team, but didn’t mean to actually shoot them? He was groggy and forgot to take the safety off?

Ms. Guerena stated several falsehoods. She said she had seen people in the bushes, so she feared a home invasion. She said there was no siren, no knock, no announcement. And she hired a criminal-defense lawyer, not a plaintiff’s lawyer.

It has been established that she did not see anyone in the bushes, and did hear the siren, knock, and announcement? How was that done?

You gravely mischaracterized the video. The siren is running 0:29 to 0:38. The knock is at 0:41, with a mechanized voice in addition to human shouting. Entry at 0:58. Gunfire at 1:04. Seventeen to thirty seconds is plenty of time to call out, “Hold on, I’m coming.” Unless you’re busy getting your gun out, I suppose.
The warrant had been for 4 homes of a circle of drug dealers who were posing as law enforcement agents. Raids at previous homes turned up large wads of cash and drugs, confirming the validity of the warrant’s leads, if not their accuracy.
Was the marine in the circle? No drugs were found, but LEO-type body armor, an LEO-type rifle, an unusually large stash of cash, a border-patrol hat, and a framed picture of Jesus Malverde, the “patron saint” of drug dealers were found. Any one of these doesn’t mean much. All together, they still aren’t enough for a conviction without further evidence. But there’s hardly an absence of evidence that would prove government malfeasance. And Guerena was crouched, pointing the LEO rifle at them.
“They could have moved the body.” The in the house was not the SWAT team, but a remote-control robot, used to determine if there was anyone else who posed a threat. And the wife did not make that allegation.
“The safety was still on.” They’d move the body but not take the safety off? How does that help Guerena’s case? He was going to lie in ambush for home invaders with the safety on? He was trying to have a standoff against an entire team, but didn’t mean to actually shoot them? He was groggy and forgot to take the safety off?

Ms. Guerena stated several falsehoods. She said she had seen people in the bushes, so she feared a home invasion. She said there was no siren, no knock, no announcement. And she hired a criminal-defense lawyer, not a plaintiff’s lawyer.

Marktwain replies: You point out some differences in the video from what I posted. On line videos are difficult to get exactly right, but I have been looking at this one more carefully.

First, the siren is on, as you state for about 9 seconds, and sounds much like a car alarm. Clearly it is not enough for a reasonable person to believe that it applies to their house.

Second, the knock could have been at 41 seconds. It certainly was not entirely clear. Yes there was considerable yelling. I could not distinguish a "mechanical voice". The door is broken down at 56. So you have 15 seconds, where before I counted 8, but I thought the knock came later. I admit it could have been as early as 41. 15 seconds is not a reasonable time for someone to get to the door and ascertain that there are legitimate police officers there. With all the yelling, I doubt if the officers could have heard someone inside saying that they were coming. If they arrive at 15 seconds, the door would have been knocked into their face.

Number of homes involved, cash and drugs found, not known at the time of my post, irrelevant to your accusation.

LEO body armor? LEO rifle? This is the first that I have heard of those items from the house characterized in that way.

"She said she had seen people in the bushes, so she feared a home invasion. She said there was no siren, no knock, no announcement. And she hired a criminal-defense lawyer" She may be lying, the video does not disprove her claims. She said she did not hear a siren, or a knock or a the announcement. Much depends on what happened before the video or outside of its range, and the acoustics of the house. She may be lying. We do not know. Clearly there is not time for a reasonable person to answer the door.

Much hinges on what she said to her husband, and we have only her word for that. If she feared a home invasion, then his actions are consistant and reasonable. If he thought the police were at the door, his actions become unreasonable, as they found nothing illegal at the house.

Moved the body? I did not say anything about moving the body. What are you talking about?

There is a lot of information and misinformation floating around about this case. I have heard that they found one rifle, that it had a scope on it, that they found on pistol, that they found three rifles, that they found a border patrol hat.

A lot more information will come out in the next few days, now that the sheriffs department has released many pages of documents. As far as I know, they continue to keep the warrant sealed.

"Unless you’re busy getting your gun out, I suppose." Strange comment, considering that the police were investigating a home invasion ring that disguised itself as police. Getting your gun seems a very rational thing to do.

The safety issue simply reinforces that Guerena did not fire, contrary to the initial claims by the Sheriffs office. The Sheriffs office has changed its story several times, so it has credibility issues much like those of Ms. Guerena.

I was trying to address all the various things I’ve read from FReepers, not to put words in your mouth. You do seem more reasonable than many I’ve encountered.

9 seconds is plenty to presume it applies to your house when it is not moving, and your door gets pounded on.

That it was an LEO type rifle comes from the testimony of his wife, who said that the rifle he was found with was just like theirs, implying that the rifle was a plant.

The LEO-type armor reference comes from the sheriff’s office, which described it and the hat as such.

As for the mechanical voice, all I can say is listen again. I hadn’t known police use mechanical voices like that, but it makes sense as it’s just another thing that fake home-invasion types would have to counterfeit.

>> 15 seconds is not a reasonable time for someone to get to the door and ascertain that there are legitimate police officers there. <<

It’s plenty of time to say, “Coming!” You can ask for the warrant once they know you are responding.

>> Number of homes involved, cash and drugs found, not known at the time of my post, irrelevant to your accusation. <<

Whether it leads to any evidence that’s usable in court is one matter, but there are plenty of people who are inferring that this guy ended up dead merely because he owned guns. The police were acting on evidence which was validated at other locations. Not knowing how they related the four homes, I can’t say whether such evidence could prove a case; our legal system says you can’t convict on the basis of “where there’s smoke, there’s fire,” but in determining the motivations of the SWAT team, it is relevant that there was smoke.

>> Much hinges on what she said to her husband, and we have only her word for that. If she feared a home invasion, then his actions are consistant and reasonable. If he thought the police were at the door, his actions become unreasonable, as they found nothing illegal at the house. <<

Culpability depends on who acted reasonably.

Raiding a house necessarily creates a dangerous situation. Know what? People posing as BP LEOs to help smuggle drugs also creates a dangerous situation. Giving criminals the chance to take the first shot is not reasonable.

Was Guerena a criminal? I don’t know. But the LEOs were executing a legal warrant. Guerena pointed a weapon at a SWAT team. That got him killed. Tragic? Possibly.

Release the warrant, what is written on the warrant?

Holding a rifle in your house is not punishable by death.

The police prevented medical help to this marine who has multiple bullet wounds for an hour. That is enough to charge the whole bunch of them in my opinion.

Great example of the maxim “There is no situation so bad it cannot be made worse by the addition of a cop.” That is tragic.