What's going on is Indiana has judicial preview ~ the laws get looked at by the supreme court right after passage to test them for constitutional adherence.
This Barnes guy got another trial as well, and that's sometimes looked at as a redo on the first trial ~ and that gets pretty complex when it comes to what happened on appeal to an intermediate court.
Nobody seems to want to come to grips with the fact this poor cop was there to defend a woman at her request. Next time we have somebody in here start kvetching about the cops not coming around to deal with crime I suggest we highjack his thread and revisit this Indiana situation.
The way I see it the real issue is nothing to do with the case per se, but rather the Supreme Court. If they are allowed to decree, as they did, that the State does not recognize the legitimacy of using violence against illegal police entry (essentially voiding the State Constitution's copy of the 4th Amendment), then there is nothing that the IN Supreme Court cannot do as they are not bound by the very constitution which instituted their office.
This does not excuse their failure, as you said, to consider the woman; but it does move things into an entirely new arena: the implementation of sharia (while detestible) does not strip everyone of their rights -- the acquiescence of the execuitive and legislative to the IN SC however creates a Kritarch in which the judges are not bound by God or Man and nobody has any right (save them).
you yourself mentioned that situation where the sewer company was illegally working past the hours they were expected to work within. Where were the cops? Deliquient right? Good for the citizens for taking the matters into their won hands for the lack of said police force, by shooting at the transformer and hopefully shutting down their work schedule at all hours of the night.