[Hajman]

Well, Zito may offer that defense, but a jury of his peers is extremely likely to throw it out--even if Zito was unquestionably correct on the Fourth Amendment issue (which, IMNHO, he isn't--at least, not to a level of absolute certainty).

I might agree with the first, however why don't you think the police did something illegal in this siutation? In other words, why do you think they had athority to do what they did? And what was the probable cause for that athority?

Most folks do NOT view blasting away as soon as the door opens to be a reasonable application of deadly force under any circumstances. With the evidence at hand, I would certainly vote convict on manslaughter charges, and would probably convict on capital murder charges unless a LOT of extenuating circumstances are present that I do not see.

Possibly, however they did break down a door trying to get in before they opened the second. On a personal note, assuming I didn't know who they were (it's hard to say what I'd do if they claimed to be police), I wouldn't hesitate to protect myself (and others). And I personally know a good number of other people that would feel the same way. But that's just on a personal note.

-The Hajman-

[Poohbah]

I might agree with the first, however why don't you think the police did something illegal in this siutation? In other words, why do you think they had athority to do what they did? And what was the probable cause for that athority?

Zito threatened the officers who were in performance of their official duties. In short, he upped the level of confrontation. He demonstrated that he was manifestly a danger to the officers (at least), and quite probably the community at large.