Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Frank Zito says he shot police because they broke his door{ unreasonable search and seizure }
The Star Democrat ^ | April 04, 2002 | By: BRIAN HAAS

Posted on 04/05/2002 8:59:46 PM PST by freespeech1

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 381-392 next last
To: sneakypete
Entry without a warrant is the same as breaking and entering a occupied dwelling.

Cheer up, you have 2 dead cops and a new hero.

41 posted on 04/05/2002 11:53:00 PM PST by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
Hell two cops are dead for violating his "rights". I mean that is worth something isn't it?

Sure does...

It means law abiding citizens were fortunate enough from being butchered by invasive thugs...it means the same thing it has for 200 years in America. If violent people unprovoked explode thru your front door, they face legal and violent consequences. Preferably a gun.

Of all people, law enforcement agencies should PROTECT us from communist tyranny like this. Instead, they CAUSE the attacks more and more.

Thanks to trial lawyers and gov agencies seeking revenue, we face ever increasing communist attacks on our private property and freedom every day.
If anyone crashes my door down unprovoked, they will face Judgement Day. No matter what costume they are wearing. It's real simple; you blow through my door, I wiill blow thru your chest cavity with a cannon.

I paid dearly for this private property. Generations of my family have given their blood to protect the land and Constitution from invasive thugs. It's an honor to continue to protect our freedom in their name

If we didn't have these laws, we'd just be another nation shooting at each other in the woods.

42 posted on 04/06/2002 12:15:14 AM PST by T. Jefferson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: T. Jefferson
Yeah, hell let's give the shooter a medal and start a telethon for his defense. The more cops dead the better...right? I'll bet your mouth waters just thinking you may have the same chance.
43 posted on 04/06/2002 12:19:04 AM PST by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ActionNewsBill
Scary, isn't it? How can they believe all of these so called informants. People do lie and I mean all sides.
44 posted on 04/06/2002 12:24:58 AM PST by freekitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
Tex, this has to be a coordinated infiltration by agent provacateurs. There cannot be this many people, all in our forum, who are so devoid of perspective, proportion and honesty that they would proclaim that the United States of America is a police state. It is such a disgraceful perversion of history and geopolitical awareness as to be either a disruptive campaign of vandalism or an appalling ignorance. And it's everywhere!!!!
45 posted on 04/06/2002 12:42:05 AM PST by ArneFufkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ArneFufkin
It's the Police State *TACTICS* that have been documented here that we're talking about...
46 posted on 04/06/2002 12:57:05 AM PST by Gigantor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Cultural Jihad
CJ - you are dead wrong. An eviction must be filed in Court, there must be a notice posted at the property, the tennant is afforded an opportunity to come into Court for the eviction hearing, then the eviction is scheduled. The process takes about 90 days.

You can't just call up the police and have them kick someone out of your property. (Which really sucks, because if you ever foreclose on a property you own, once the foreclosure sale is completed the former "owners" now are trespassers - but then still must be evicted)

I know this case - the officers were there to serve something...the suppression issue is an interesting one that the defense might prevail on....

47 posted on 04/06/2002 1:06:53 AM PST by Abundy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ActionNewsBill; texasforever
Look, I'm not saying the situation here is comparable to Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union (not yet, anyways), but there is a disturbing trend towards more and more of this kind of out-of-control police behavior.

Johnnie Lawmaster returned home last December 16 to find that his front and back doors had been broken down with a battering ram, and his personal papers, legally-registered guns and ammo strewn all over the floor. Furniture was broken and gas, electricity and water had been shut off. The only explanation was a note reading: Nothing Found - ATF. Neighbors informed Lawmaster that 60agents in a joint team of local and state police and the Federal Bureau ofAlcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms had raided the house to search for illegal weapons. Lawmaster's lawyer is demanding to see the affidavit supporting the search warrant, but the Tulsa federal attorney has had it sealed.

The hell it isn't as bad - note that an attorney, demanding to see an affidavit for a search warrant that lead to the trashing of his client's home, is being denied that affidavit by a Federal Attorney. That's bullshit and not indicative of a free society.

Having assisted in the service of about 30+ search warrants I can assure you both that the police are required to leave a copy of the signed search warrant and the signed affidavit with the homeowner. Period, end of story.

48 posted on 04/06/2002 1:15:24 AM PST by Abundy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
The police were given the key to the house by the owner of the house.

A landlord cannot give the police a key to a tennant's residence for 4th Amendment purposes. IOW, a landlord request to the police to enter a tennant's residence does not alleviate the 4th Amendment prohibitions on the police. The tennant has an expectation of privacy that requires a search warrant for the police to enter unless some exigency exists. In terms of a home, a loud noise complaint is not a recognized exigency. Recognized exigencies include actual knowledge that a wanted felon is inside the residence, hot pursuit or seeing in plain view some sort of illegal activity (not "loud noise", and the police have to be legally in the position to see the contraband - i.e., they can't just walk into a yard and peer in windows to see if they see anything in "plain view")

Again, the suppression ruling is not clear cut by any means here.

49 posted on 04/06/2002 1:20:12 AM PST by Abundy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: ActionNewsBill
That list is absolutely chilling. Obviously asset seizure has completely perverted the rule of law and common sense. I think that police departments being rewarded based on the value of what they seize has, at least in part, resulted in these tragic cases. Maybe if seized assets were auctioned off by charities instead of by police departments who can use the funds to supplement their budgets, they might actually THINK before crashing into someone's home. The status quo is too great a risk for the general population, not to mention the officers getting who are being gunned down too.

Think about it: If you've just arrested someone who is high on drugs, he's going say whatever he can say to protect his own ass. Whether that means pointing the finger at an innocent, or simply being too stoned to get the address right, it doesn't really matter.

A TIP FROM A SOMEONE WHO IS A CRIMINAL SUSPECT, BY ITSELF, SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO OBTAIN A WARRANT AND DO "COMMANDO-STYLE" RAIDS. PERIOD.

This is just lazy law enforcement. They've got to do some due diligence and corroborate this type of evidence through other sources. With the "anti-terrorism" laws that now allow police to get warrants after the fact for wiretaps, there is NO excuse.

Oh, and about the topic that this thread is actually about, the police are in the wrong. No question. As far as I'm concerned, the mother is an accessory for providing the keys. I lived in an apartment that I rented from a less-than-professional landlord once, and it took my threatening to press charges to stop him from entering my unit illegally.

50 posted on 04/06/2002 1:22:46 AM PST by badfreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Abundy
re. #47

Having been a landlord in the past, you are certainly right about eviction. Furthurmore, if a renter claims hardship it is next to imposible to get an eviction.

All my lease agreements had a clause stating that the property owner or his agent had the right to inspect the property. By giving the police the key, they (the police) may have been acting as the owners agent. Jusa a thought.

51 posted on 04/06/2002 1:23:14 AM PST by cannonball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: ArneFufkin; cap'n crunch
AF -

As a former police officer I find you lack of perspective appalling. It is every citizen's responsibility to insure that your rights are respected by the police. That is accomplished by legitimate criticism of their actions.

My heart goes out to the families of my brother officers; but I am outraged at the mindset of the departments that lead to these horrific tragedies. Officers are not being taught to respect the Constitutional Rights of the individuals they encounter - leading to incidents like this.

My recollection of this incident is that these officers knew this individual to be of limited capacity, having dealt with him before. Once at the noise complaint, if they felt there was some sort of threat, the proper response is to secure the location to prevent violence and call for more units. Kicking in a door is a last resort and can only be done without a warrant in very limited, specific circumstances - which most likely didn't exist here.

The viewpoints you see being expressed are legitimate, if a bit crude. Police tactics have eroded to the point that even officers themselves are beginning to question what is occurring.

In the instant case, we now have two dead cops and an individual of limited intelligence charged with two murders. And it all could have been avoided had they been taught proper procedure - which comes from a healthy respect of the Constitutional Rights of individuals - even yours.

52 posted on 04/06/2002 1:28:40 AM PST by Abundy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: cannonball
Sure, they can act as the owner's agent, but what they see inside is suppressable as they are required to obtain a search warrant to enter. Also, by acting as the owner's agent they incur liability for the department if they violate landlord-tennant laws.

Bottom line, unless they have one of the recognized exigencies to enter without a warrant, they can't regardless of whether the landlord gives them a key or not.

With respect to the suppression hearing, if the judge rules they couldn't enter without a warrant, the State will not be able to sustain the murder charge - as they were armed trespassers. Also, the statements can be supressed as "fruits of the poisonous tree."

53 posted on 04/06/2002 1:32:11 AM PST by Abundy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Abundy
No I think my perspective is fine. That's murder, there's no EXCUSE for shooting policemen who have requested your assistance and then enter your abode, that's not a self-defense scenario and I hope he gets the big ticket. And I hope anyone else who chooses to murder cops doing their job gets the death sentence too.
54 posted on 04/06/2002 1:35:08 AM PST by ArneFufkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: cannonball
"All my lease agreements had a clause stating that the property owner or his agent had the right to inspect the property. By giving the police the key, they (the police) may have been acting as the owners agent."

I don't think that makes it legal. I don't know about your jurisdiction, but where I am, for any entry to a rented premesis, the landlord must provide a minimum of 24 hours written notice, complete with a specific reason for entry. This applies to inspections too. The entry must be within "reasonable hours." I had fun with a landlord once whose definition of "reasonable" was Monday to Friday between 9 and 5. I was working overnights at the time, so my definition of reasonable was somewhat different.

The only exceptions to the 24-hour-notice rule are emergencies (e.g. fire, flood, etc.) and rental viewings to prospective tenants after the tenant has provided the proper 60-day notice that they plan to vacate, also subject to the vague "reasonable hours" language.

55 posted on 04/06/2002 1:39:03 AM PST by badfreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: ArneFufkin
No I think my perspective is fine. That's murder, there's no EXCUSE for shooting policemen who have requested your assistance and then enter your abode, that's not a self-defense scenario and I hope he gets the big ticket. And I hope anyone else who chooses to murder cops doing their job gets the death sentence too.

Do you even understand what constitutes murder? No, you don't. It is a pre-meditated, unlawful killing of a human with malice aforethought. The facts here don't constitute murder to begin with. There is no malice-aforethought or premeditation - even if the defendant comes back competent to stand trial. His own statements help him more than they hurt him with respect to his belief at the time he pulled the trigger. He didn't know they were police when he shot? The State will have a hard time proving he wasn't shooting in self-defense. But don't take it from me, it's just my job and I don't know what I'm talking about I guess.

More scary, is your absolute refusal to address my points. Sad and Scary. "Policeman requesting your assistance and then enter your abode?" What bullshit. You do realize that you have an absolute right not to speak to the police, don't you? You do realize that you have an absolute right not to open your door to the police, don't you? You do realize that the police are required to obtain a search warrant to enter your abode, don't your?

Why don't you go over to Democratic Underground where you belong?

56 posted on 04/06/2002 1:41:56 AM PST by Abundy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Abundy
So did you get bounced off the force? They opened the door with a key. He shot them in cold blood. You guys are beyond deluded. Stay out of my community nutjobs.
57 posted on 04/06/2002 1:48:44 AM PST by ArneFufkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Abundy
The difference between you and me? I can separate an illegal entry from shotgunning individuals I know are police officers. I don't care, if a cop identifies himself and walks through my open front door, kicks my door down or comes down the chimney ... if I shoot him that's murder. Regardless of the 4th Amendment issue. You people suck.
58 posted on 04/06/2002 1:53:20 AM PST by ArneFufkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: ArneFufkin
"They opened the door with a key."

SFW? My landlord has a key to my apartment, and were he to use it without following proper procedures, he would be breaking the law, just like these dead cops. If they had used a little common sense, they would be alive right now.

59 posted on 04/06/2002 1:53:56 AM PST by badfreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: ArneFufkin
No, I didn't get bounced off the force, moron. I went to law school and now prosecute for the State. Maybe I have a little more expertise than you do, douchebag.

The legality of there entry doesn't turn on whether they had a key or whether they identified themselves as officers. (which, by the way, is a fact not in evidence, as there is no mention in this article that they identified themselves) Try sticking to the facts, counselor.

The legality of the entry turns on whether there was a recognized exigency that allowed them to enter without a warrant. A noise complaint is not a recognized exigency. Period.

Again, my heart goes out to the families of my brother officers. The whole incident is a tragedy...and it could have been avoided.

You, however, are the nutjob and I don't want you in my community. Next thing you know, you'd have everyone wearing brownshirts and high-stepping down the middle of the streets...

60 posted on 04/06/2002 1:58:54 AM PST by Abundy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 381-392 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson