Posted on 10/05/2014 1:25:00 PM PDT by Drew68
A Georgia man was killed by police executing a search warrant obtained after a car thief told police he stole methamphetamine from the dead man’s vehicle, media reports say.
...snip...
The homeowner, David Hooks, a 59-year-old grandfather and businessman, reported the missing SUV.
...snip...
An hour after getting the search warrant, Shook said David Hooks’ wife saw camouflaged men in her yard with guns and told her husband.
David Hooks’ final act was to arm himself with a shotgun.
...snip...
Police searched the home for 44 hours and found no drugs.
(Excerpt) Read more at newstome.blog.ajc.com ...
“Furthermore, if there is a blame, blame the car thief for a false lead. Also, blame the judge issuing the warrant based on a false lead. Cops were there executing the warrant.”
The cops happily participated in this. They joined SWAT for the adventure of playing commando. Make no mistake, they knew better. And they understand the confusion their raids create.
They ARE as responsible as the judge and the criminal.
I have no idea how big the police department in question is, or how far it is from the top brass to the troops, but if the department is any size:
A warrant most likely comes down from one of the officers on duty to the troops who must serve it.
The troops probably have no idea at all what is behind it, what led up to it, etc.
They have a warrant that says this guy is bad ass and go get him. So they do.
If any one here is more aware of the inner workings of this particular department, please enlighten.
So the blame is not on the officers that served the warrant unless it was not a no knock.
The blame is on the department head; the chief, the people that hire and monitor the chief for the practice of running swat type operations at the drop of a hat.
And most of all, for not conducting a reasonable investigation as to who the person really is that was ratted out by the car thief.
It is stupid beyond understanding that a responsible police department would perform as this one did on the word of the thief with no supporting investigation.
Any investigation of any kind, even superficial, would have indicated that a normal knock on the door by a detective with a few questions would have sufficed.
So it is really top management that should be condemned, fired, sued and then ridden out of town on a rail.
It is the manner in which this department is managed that is at fault.
“We all have our opinion and principals”, your statement not mine.
My principals say that no human is good by default, UNTIL proven otherwise.
My opinion tells me that you sir, are an ignorant ass.
A 44 hour search just to find nothing tells me all I need to know about the cops motivation in this case.
>> wife saw camouflaged men in her yard with guns
Tough guys.
Were the buttons bursting around their waistlines?
Ya missed a little, lower lip. Get that cleaned up.
Jesse and Al are on their way - and Holder will be holding a press conference - all to egg on all those protestors -
Oh wait: the guy was a white man - right? I mean, there’s no rioting and looting - must’ve been white man.
no foul...
“So the blame is not on the officers that served the warrant unless it was not a no knock.”
Wrong. These SWAT pigs full well understand human surprise response just as well as anyone. They full well understand that they CREATE a situation in which the victim has mere moments to correctly identify the situation and react.
So they do understand the danger to innocent people that they create through these shock raids. THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE. They are responsible for choosing to participate in the most evil form of police activity, all because they want the thrill of being a ‘special operator’. They know what they are doing is wrong.
“the cops were so stupid that they couldn’t even plant evidence in 44 hours worth of time!”
I despise the way swat teams are used as much as anyone.
But I have to ask the question, and you do not answer it:
How does the warrant come down to the troops?
Do you think the head of the swat team went to the judge’s office and argued for the warrant?
How does this work in that department?
My guess would be that the cop who talked to the thief gave his report to the superior who then probably gave it to the DA who probably was the one who went to the judge.
My guess is that all the swat guys knew was that they had a piece of paper that said to go get a bad ass guy.
Frankly, I don’t even think swat teams should exist.
But swat team or not, what does the ordinary cop know about the guy he is going to get other than what is on the warrant, unless of course they are going after some famous bad ass like the guy Fien in PA.
I am no cop. Far from it. But it has always been my impression that in any large department you commanding officer tells you to go get him and if you do not, you end up a meter maid.
That old bullsh#t of “the cops are here, quick flush the evidence” is just exactly that, BULLSH#T.
Any cop with even a partially functioning brain knows all you have to do is get your warrant, call the City Public Works department and ask them to isolate the city block, or two blocks or twenty blocks of the sewer system.
Every thing that goes down there can be recovered, hell I’ve pulled wedding rings, lockets and even false teeth out of the dip in the first manhole downstream from an address.
You just have to be willing to pay for the cities time on the job. If the packages are small enough to go down the water closet but light enough to float you just ask the city to drop screens at every street sewer junction then you serve your warrant.
Not true. The link below is to an article on the subject of "no-knock" warrants in Georgia, and clearly explains constitutional standards that apply.
reason.com/Georgia_Senate_Committee
The article mentions Kathryn Johnston, an elderly Atlanta woman who was killed by police in a "no-knock' raid in 2006. The link below is to a wikipedia article about the entire circumstance of her death, and the despicable, illegal and deadly actions of law enforcement officers.
wikipedia.org/Kathryn_Johnston_shooting
From the reason.com article, these paragraphs stand out:
"While I suppose it's a good sign that Georgia's lawmakers want to do something, this bill would change almost nothing. It would basically mean police officers in Georgia would have to comply with the bare minimum standards for a no-knock entry laid out by the Supreme Court in Wilson v. Arkansas. That opinion required police to knock and announce before entering a home unless they could show that the suspect presented a threat to the safety of police officers or there existed the possibility that the suspect could dispose of evidence. In other words, this bill would force Georgia to comply with the minimal constitutional protections the state should have been following for 14 years."
"The real issue here is forced entry, and the use of forced entry tactics to serve warrants for nonviolent crimes. If the Georgia legislature is serious about preventing more botched raids, they'll strictly limit the number of situations in which police can break into someone's home to serve a warrant. These tactics should be limited to only the most severe situations, when a suspect presents an immediate threat to the safety of others—think hostage takings, violent fugitives, or shootings. So long as the law allows cops to kick down doors in pursuit of neighborhood dope slingers, we'll continue to have more Kathryn Johnstons. As there have been."
And the finale - also from wiki:
"The number of no-knock raids has increased from 3,000 in 1981 to more than 50,000 in 2005, according to Peter Kraska, a criminologist at Eastern Kentucky University in Richmond.[1] Raids that lead to deaths of innocent people are increasingly common; since the early 1980s, 40 bystanders have been killed, according to the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C.[1]"
You’d think the cops could drop a find in a tenth that amount of time.
Why not just call the owner in for questioning, regarding drugs found in his stolen car?
Why send a camouflaged SWAT team, for crying out loud?
I've seen few clearer indications that modern domestic police forces view citizens as the enemy and believe that they are at war with them.
It's not a civil rights thing at all. My suggestion is meant to prevent dangerous misunderstandings.
Suppose it's eleven o'clock in the sagar household. Everyone is fast asleep. Then you hear your front door being broken down. Someone yells "police".
What do you do? Dial 911, for sure. Then do you grab a gun to defend your family from a home invasion? Or do you come out of your bedroom with both hands up? Pick the wrong answer (either way) and perhaps you get shot and your family gets hurt, or worse.
But suppose the police were required to turn on sirens and lights the instant they hit your door. Then you'd have some idea what to do, and what not to do.
Most states have laws that mandate the notice and that is therefore Constitutional by definition. For example, in California:
California’s “Knock -Notice” Rule
Before an officer may execute a California search warrant at a person’s home (or possibly his/her business), the officer must
knock on the door,
announce him/herself as a law enforcement officer,
inform the occupant that he/she has a search warrant, and
give the occupant enough time to open the door.
Go read the Federalist Papers and see what problems the Founders had with searches. But I doubt you would see the light.
Yeah, the warrant that the cops presented to the magistrate for rubber stamp. I blame the cops.
Your blanket statement about being armed to defend yourself being "suicide by cop" has an "it depends" answer. You seem pretty smart, so look up Indiana law on the subject. It wasin the news on Indiana Supreme Court decision(s) in the past couple years.
People v. Macioce, (1987) 197 Cal.App.3d 262, 271 (”The purposes and policies supporting the ‘knock-notice’ rules are fourfold: (1) the protection of the privacy of the individual in his home; (2) the protection of innocent persons present on the premises; (3) the prevention of situations which are conducive to violent confrontations between the occupant and individuals who enter his home without proper notice; and (4) the protection of police who might be injured by a startled and fearful householder.”)
Again, that’s California but I’d be amazed if equivalent case law did not exist in Georgia.
And the four points in that court decision are the practical application of the Fourth Amendment, viz. “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated”
So there it is, IN THE CONSTITUTION.
I can’t believe the cops believed the guy in the stolen car. I also can’t believe a judge was talked into signing a search warrant.
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.