Posted on 04/23/2013 5:46:29 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
A startling home-made video now shows the terrifying moments where Watertown residents were forced out of their homes at gunpoint as SWAT teams performed door-to-door searches as they hunted the second marathon bomber.
While millions of Bostonians waited in their houses on Friday during the city-wide lockdown, the people of Watertown were faced with SWAT officers yelling at them to get out of the buildings immediately.
At the time, the Boston police department and federal agents were barely criticized, but now many are concerned about the dangerous precedent that could lead to more police searches using the rationale of ‘exigent circumstances’ as an excuse.
The video, shot by an unidentified Watertown resident, shows a team of SWAT officers wielding semi-automatic guns bang on his neighbor’s front door and scream for them to get out of the house’.
The residents are whisked away- hands in the air, one by one- to a nearby group of officers as the SWAT team searches the house for the second shooter, 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.
Early reports, made by journalists who were kept out of Watertown by a police barricade, said that the searches were voluntary.
Now, the video published on right-wing conservative news blog InfoWars, asserts that the searches were involuntary, as all residents were forced out of their homes whether they liked it or not.
The six-minute video shows just one search of the suburban town’s homes during the day-long lockdown. While the outside world looked to the media gathered on the perimeter of Watertown, those trapped inside the search area looked outside to scary sights.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
You dumb idiot. Start with the guy who filmed the encounter.
Testing... testing...test done.
Can you point me to one legitimate source that is claiming these searches were illegal?
Because the source of this article is InfoWars.
Is Alex Jones your authority on these matters?
Probable cause
Main article: Probable cause
When police conduct a search, the amendment requires that the warrant establishes probable cause to believe that the search will uncover criminal activity or contraband. They must have legally sufficient reasons to believe a search is necessary. In Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925), the Supreme Court stated that probable cause to search is a flexible, common-sense standard. To that end, the Court ruled in Dumbra v. United States, 268 U.S. 435 (1925), that the term probable cause means “less than evidence that would justify condemnation,” reiterating Carroll’s assertion that it merely requires that the facts available to the officer would “warrant a man of reasonable caution” in the belief that specific items may be contraband or stolen property or useful as evidence of a crime.[42] It does not demand any showing that such a belief be correct or more likely true than false. A “practical, non-technical” probability that incriminating evidence is involved is all that is required.[43] In Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983), the Supreme Court ruled that the reliability of an informant is to be determined based on the “totality of the circumstances.”
At common law, a police officer could arrest an individual if that individual committed a misdemeanor in the officer’s presence or if the officer had probable cause to believe that the individual committed a felony. For misdemeanors, probable cause to believe that a wrongdoer committed a misdemeanor is not sufficient for an arrest—the police officer has to actually witness the misdemeanor.[34]
The standards of probable cause differ for an arrest and a search. The government has a probable cause to make an arrest when “the facts and circumstances within their knowledge and of which they had reasonably trustworthy information” would lead a prudent person to believe that the arrested person had committed or was committing a crime.[44] Probable cause to arrest must exist before the arrest is made. Evidence obtained after the arrest may not apply retroactively to justify the arrest.[45]
bookmark
Yep, that's how liberty dies ... with thunderous applause.
Do you also advocate this tactic for cleaning up the barbarian gangs in Chicago killing ten people every week?
BS -- that video was posted here long before Infowars got a hold of it.
If they just wanted the houses “evacuated”, why were they frisking everyone who came out???
Is it reasonable to conduct a house to house ARMED SWAT TEAM MILITARY STYLE POLICE STATE search forcing people out of their homes, scaring children , demanding come out with your hands up..patting you down as you try to get out of your house on the sidewalk....
WHEN YOU DONT EVEN USE DOGS TO TRAIL THE GUYS SCENT TO HIS REAL HIDEOUT????
The search they did IS NOT REASONABLE when they don’t even use basic police tools to catch a killer.
I have two cousins (Boston Police officers) that were involved in the search. The escape car was abandoned in the neighborhood that was searched. They did have search dogs involved in the search for suspect#2. Initially there was a blood trail that lead to a basement of a house in the area. At one point he was in the basement but fled. The boat was just outside the search perimeter which is why it wasn't searched before. The police suspected that a terrorists cell may be harboring suspect#2. Both suspects used bombs against the police earlier that night. They assumed that suspect#2 still had explosives. The boat owner did not notice the torn tarp since he was in is house all day under the shelter in place order. It wasn't until the order was lifted and he went outside to smoke that he saw the torn tarp.
The video of the house search is disturbing but I do not know the circumstances. I'd have to see a few more videos before I'd get really concerned. Could be the house being searched was "a house of interest". I very much doubt this search was typical of all the house to house searches.
To sum up, looks like a practice run to me, with a few homes selected for "special treatment", not a serious effort to apprehend the bomber.
I watched Alex Jones’ sites for the last few days as he desperately searched for any way he could to twist this story into something that he could use to make fools out of conservatives.
Looks like he finally succeeded with this video.
Now he’s getting help from the Brit rags, who have to sell papers after all.
Sad that any US citizen would cheer police demanding that you come out of your castle. Doubtful I would have complied.
Nice non-answer.
Do you also advocate this tactic for cleaning up the barbarian gangs in Chicago killing ten people every week?
Oka, so he was in the basement and got out. How did the dogs not pick up the scent????? He is wounded???????
The torn tarp. Look at the video of the robot tearing the tarp.
It doesn’t look torn at the beginning of that video.
This particular video shows numerous adult male residents, suggestive of a frat house. So it’s possible someone reported suspicious activity there.
If the police did house-to-house searches anywhere, we’ll be seeing the videos soon.
As for the sheeple, they’ll still whine if they think it’ll get them attention and settlement dough.
Pox on both houses.
Because the source of this article is InfoWars.
Is Alex Jones your authority on these matters?
Once again with the ad hominem. It's becoming tiresome. I have commented on several threads about this, giving my perspective from 20 years in law enforcement. My authority is two police academies and a career in the very field we are discussing.
It doesn't matter to me what Alex Jones says or not. I am not claiming that the Boston searches were illegal, therefore the officers are all lizard people. I am raising what I believe to be reasonable challenges and questions regarding the actions of my comrades in uniform.
Of note, you still refuse to answer the question. Rather telling.
So you boating people out there...
does this look like a torn up tarp before the robot tears it up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUKjia37jPg
What is the word on Info Wars?
I posted from them once and got shouted down. I don’t know why.
They seem to have some sort of stigma or bad reputation. What is that?
Please advise.
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.