No-Knock Warrants

[Michigander]

I was trying to find statistics about the number/percentage of no-knock warrants that are issued/executed. Apparently, nobody really keeps track of this kind of stuff.

But I did find this about no-knocks for Colorado Springs PD:

.40 NO.KNOCK SEARCH WARRANT: The legality and use of no-knock search warrants has been affirmed by the Colorado Supreme Court.

In preparing the affidavit for a no-knock search warrant, the affiant must cite specific probable cause to believe that:

· The subject or subjects inside the premises to be searched will destroy or dispose of evidence sought by the warrant;

OR

· The subject/subjects inside the premises are armed and dangerous and that announcing entry would endanger the lives and/or safety of officers and/or other persons;

OR

· Announcing entry would cause the subject/subjects in the premises, who are to be arrested, to escape.

Information which may substantiate the need for a no-knock warrant may be found in many ways, including:

...

FIREARMS SALES RECORDS: A check with the Investigations Division Pawn Detail may provide information that the suspect has purchased a weapon. This information, coupled with a propensity toward violence, may afford the affiant sufficient probable cause for a no-knock warrant.

csindy.com

I find it interesting that most of us here at THR would all have firearms and many would have purchased some recently and considering the number of firearm owners, and that "all men [should] be armed," etc., it would seem to me that the police should assume that anyone who may be at a residence in which a warrant is to be issued would be armed.

This no-knock stuff gets my goat!


As for stats, this is all I have found so far:

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0325/little.php

Presenting numbers backed up by incomplete data, Kelly testified before a City Council hearing this month that about 13,000 warrants were issued between January 2001 and May 2003, the vast majority being no-knock.

the following two websites corroborate the above:
http://www.nyclu.org/nypd_search_warrant_testimony_060603.html
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_835.shtml

________

http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread3889.shtml

Last year [1999], Denver's Metro SWAT officers executed 148 immediate-entry searches, mostly in cases where police were looking for evidence of narcotics. ... That was a 38 percent increase over the 107 "no knock" warrants issued by Denver judges in 1997.

________

http://www.ndsn.org/july97/swat.html

The research shows that between 1990 and 1995 SWAT units were employed in their traditional roles for only a small number of occasions. Instead 75% of their activities were devoted to serving "high risk" warrants, such as "no-knock" warrants, mostly drug searches.

________


http://www.counterpunch.org/jackboot.html

Bovard notes that unfortunately, no-knock raids are becoming more common as federal, state and local politicians and law enforcement agencies decide that the war on drugs justified nullifying the Fourth Amendment. "As Charles Patrick Garcia noted in a 1993 Columbia Law Review article, 'Seven states, favoring strong law enforcement, have chosen a `blanket approach', which holds that once police have established probably cause to search a home for drugs, they are not required to follow the constitutional knock-and-announce requirement.'

________

http://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/lpop/etext/okla/thoreen24.htm

Fifteen years ago, city [police] departments called out their tactical units little more than once a month on average, usually for rare events such as hostage situations or barricaded suspects. By 1995, tactical units were being called out, on average, seven times per month, most often for no-knock drug raids.

No hard numbers yet, but no-knocks are certainly not as rare as some people would have us believe and all indications is that the number of no-knock is on the increase and has been for some time.

Just ramblin'

 

[Art Eatman]

"FIREARMS SALES RECORDS: A check with the Investigations Division Pawn Detail may provide information that the suspect has purchased a weapon. This information, coupled with a propensity toward violence, may afford the affiant sufficient probable cause for a no-knock warrant."

As you look at this, Michigander, don't ignore the part that says "...coupled with a propensity toward violence..."

Sure, there are lots of folks here at THR who have lots of guns. But, how many would you think are known for a propensity toward violence? You don't get that reputation or have that thought of you unless you have a past history of Serious No-no.

Purely opinion, but it seems to me that maybe there are more raids where small quantities of drugs are involved. One flush and they're gone. Thus, more no-knock entries. But, maybeso our LEOs can search their own memories about this. Compare the typical size of the expected seizure for these last few years with those of ten or twenty years ago.

Art

 

[liliysdad]

Yes, they are on the rise, and they are rightfully so. Criminals are getting more dangerous....and the chance for officer and suspect injuryis ever increasing.

HOWEVER, they are still very far from normal.....

If you are so much against this type of warrant service and the so-called violation of rights, I vote we return to a time when all cops carried revolvers, and drove Ford Galaxies. Along with this "Andy and Barney" myth we get to get rid of the cameras, the body mic's, the ACLU, the written operating procedures, regain the use of blackjacks and nightsticks, no peer review boards, no administrative leave, no civil liability, no laws against racial profiling...etc, etc.

We got a deal? I didnt think so.

 

[Michigander]

As you look at this, Michigander, don't ignore the part that says "...coupled with a propensity toward violence..."

Oh, I didn't overlook that. What I am saying is that all they really need to do is show a "propensity toward violence" and just assume there are firearms. At least that was what I was trying to say, somewhat sarcastically.

Yes, they are on the rise, and they are rightfully so. Criminals are getting more dangerous....and the chance for officer and suspect injuryis ever increasing.

Let's see: no-knocks on the rise and the chance of officer and suspect injuries on the rise. Hmm. I'm sure there's no causual effect there.(!)

If you are so much against this type of warrant service and the so-called violation of rights, I vote we return to a time when all cops carried revolvers, and drove Ford Galaxies. Along with this "Andy and Barney" myth we get to get rid of the cameras, the body mic's, the ACLU, the written operating procedures, regain the use of blackjacks and nightsticks, no peer review boards, no administrative leave, no civil liability, no laws against racial profiling...etc, etc.

What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? If we suddenly did away with no-knock warrants accross the board tomorrow, what would this have to do with revolvers, Ford Galazies, cameras, body mic's, etc.? Unless you mean that LEO's would have that many fewer drug related property/money seizers and therefore less income for the department. In that case, I understand the relationship.

 

[DMF]

Oh yeah, info from websites that end in . . . /jackboot , and cannabisnews.com, etc.

No bias there, right?

Not rare huh? 148 in Denver in 1999? Any guess as to the total number of warrants issued and served in that city for 1999? Denver is a VERY large city, so I'm guessing 148 isn't all that many.

The criteria for CO is interesting too, but just because you establish PC in one of those areas it doesn't guarantee the judge will approve the no-knock.

 

[liliysdad]

This has to be the deadest horse Ive seen on this board. The bleeding heart libertarians hate no-knocks, and think the cops love them. Usd cops rarely use them, but the libs think they are used everyday for misdeameanor FTA warrants.......they want full acountability for the cops, yet they dont want us to have the tools do our job correctly.

It boils down to one simple point. We should be out stopping crime until that momet that it might actually impact YOUR life....sorry, it doesnt work that way. No-knocks are not a violation of the 4th, as PC must be obtained beforehand, and must be signed by a magistrate. They are simply one tool of many, rarely used, that pisses everyone off, until its your ass we save, or the killer of your friend we apprehend...then we didnt do it fast enough, or mean enough.

Just remember, guys, we work for them

 

[Michigander]

Oh yeah, info from websites that end in . . . /jackboot , and cannabisnews.com, etc.

If the various departments kept records on these things, I wouldn't have to go to websites like those to even get a glimpse of the numbers. I wonder why they don't keep track? Kinda like not keeping track of CCW's issued to certain populations in California perhaps?

Not rare huh? 148 in Denver in 1999? Any guess as to the total number of warrants issued and served in that city for 1999? Denver is a VERY large city, so I'm guessing 148 isn't all that many.

The criteria for CO is interesting too, but just because you establish PC in one of those areas it doesn't guarantee the judge will approve the no-knock.

I see you ignored the 38% increase in two years trend, conveniently. If this trend continued through 2003, it would be around 230 no-knocks. So even though there is no "guarantee" the judge will approve a no-knock, it is getting more and more likely!

 

[liliysdad]

Do you honestyl have any idea how many warrants are served everyday? I really doubt you do. The increasing trend in no-knoks, while nowere even remotely close to your exaggerated claims, is evident of the increasing severity of crimes committed.

Contrary to what you believe, an early morning no-knock is far safer to all involved IF the criteria for a no-knock is met, i.e, known, dangerous subjects who have a propensity, or at least good reason, to resist with harmful intent.

As much as it irks you, officer safety is still number one. Our lives are no less important than yours, and arguably more important than the lives of certain subjects upon which such warrants are executed. Do not twist these words into some self-serving idiom for your cause...in a perfect world, the bad guys would cuff themselves, and come strolling out naked..but that aint gonna happen. The cops are there for a reason, and it aint casue they are nice folks.

 

[Michigander]

As much as it irks you, officer safety is still number one.

Yup. Too bad the Constitution isn't number one.

 

[insidious_calm]

WHOA!

I thinks lilysdad is a little out of touch with reality. Guess what Lily, MY LIFE IS MORE IMPORTANT TO ME THAN YOURS! Back at ya! Just you remember that the next time you get the wrong house at 3:00am. Your blood will be on your own hands. You cops need to wake up! Us ordinary law abiding joes are getting sick of your attitude problems, the giant chips you carry on your shoulders, and your UTTER LACK OF RESPECT FOR US!

What is so hard to understand about the situation? You act like you are above the law and in many cases you are. One only needs to listen to a scanner for an evening to prove that. "Joe I've got your kid over here on a DUI. You wanna come get him?" I've heard CRAP like that so many times it's sickening. Normally I don't pay it any mind. My job has perks too. You people though, you're just over the top.


I.C.



Edited to add: It really is all about respect. What's wrong with admitting it when you screw up? And then taking ownership of problem and correcting it? I guess that would be too grown up?

 

[CannibalCrowley]

liliysdad

Do you honestyl have any idea how many warrants are served everyday? I really doubt you do.

None of us do because the LE agencies refuse to keep accurate records.

Contrary to what you believe, an early morning no-knock is far safer to all involved IF the criteria for a no-knock is met

That's a big "if" and it isn't always met.

As much as it irks you, officer safety is still number one.

Please explain why the safety of LEOs is more important than that of innocent people who happen to be on the wrong side of officer negligence.

 

[deej]

Whatever happened to that "to protect and serve" stuff, anyway.

 

[liliysdad]

LOL..I find it awfullyu amusing, and very sad, that you assume that every warrant served is a no-knock, and that every no-knock is at that wrong house, and that "innocents" are on the other side, knitting quilts, and baking cookies, while singing show tunes. Thats not the way it is, my friend.

In reality, 99.99% of police warrant services go by without a hitch...and you never, ever hear about those...its only the ones that the media deem "juicy" enough, the few that go wrong, that you hear about..and you illustrate exactly why. Mistakes happen...its life. They are unfortunate..very, very unfortunate, but they will happen. The alternative is not something I care to think about.

 

[liliysdad]

We do protect and serve...the community. The people upon whom the warrants are issued have commited a crime against society....thus the swift apprehension and prosecution of said subjects is "to protect and serve".

 

[deej]

The people upon whom the warrants are issued have commited a crime against society

No; generally speaking, the people upon whom the warrants are issued are innocent until proven guilty.

 

[liliysdad]

In a court of law, yes they are innocent. We cannot afford that luxury, and to think we can is foolish. It has never been that way, and never will be..if that were the case, then there would be no arrests, simply mailed out requests to appear in court. Lets get real here.

 

[insidious_calm]

It's not about the mistakes...

It's about not correcting the mistakes! Noones perfect, NOONE! I understand that. But don't you think when you DO screw up you oughta at least make it right? Is that to much to ask? I guess it is, because in the "sensational .5%" that we hear about the cops always aggravate the problem with attitude, lack of respect, and lack of accountability. Ever think you could repair the house you just destroyed on accident? "Nope, couldn't do that. That would mean ADMITTING a mistake and that is expressly against policy!" It's not rocket science guys. RESPECT, COURTESY, ACCOUNTABILITY, KINDNESS. If you had even a modicum of those we wouldn't having this conversation now, because the papers would be reporting "Cops rebuild house after mistaken raid" instead of "JBT's raid the wrong house. House trashed and family pet shot to death." See the difference?


I.C.

 

[liliysdad]

I would be willing to bet that nine out of ten times the house is repaired, or at least reparations made. If we injure a suspect in the process of detainment..we pay for the bill at the ER.....no difference. Of course, you would never hear about such things, now would you?

 

[CannibalCrowley]

liliysdad

In reality, 99.99% of police warrant services go by without a hitch

Do you have facts to back up that number or was it just pulled from a random orifice?

I would be willing to bet that nine out of ten times the house is repaired, or at least reparations made. If we injure a suspect in the process of detainment..we pay for the bill at the ER.....no difference.

Are the reparations paid willingly, or do the victims have to sue? And what happens when an innocent person is killed due to LEO negligence?

 

[Michigander]

In reality, 99.99% of police warrant services go by without a hitch...and you never, ever hear about those...its only the ones that the media deem "juicy" enough, the few that go wrong, that you hear about..and you illustrate exactly why.

And where did you get the numbers from? I think your reality is as skewed as mine, if not more so.

I would be willing to bet that nine out of ten times the house is repaired, or at least reparations made.

Conveniently there are no numbers to see if that is true.

 

[liliysdad]

Seems as neither of us have numbers, yet you have the liberally biased media on your side, so it must be true.

All I am saying is that we do not try for a no-knock every time a warrant is issued...felony warrants in and of themselves are rare in the grand scheme of things, and no-knocks even rarer...believe me, I know this. It is also fact that almost all of warrant services go as planned....knock on the door, guy comes out, and you hook him up...no problems...its the ones you hear abot that go dreadfully wrong.

You will not be convinced, as you are set in your "personal accountability" guise for anarchy, and are convinced we are all jack booted nazi minions of some great state evil....as neither will I, as I accept the truth.

Rough men are to be dealt with in rough ways...if you dont like this, and this somehow troubles your fragile sensibilities, then Im sorry.....but crime isnt going away, and neither will the dynamic entry warrant, until there is no demand....which I would love to be soon, personally....but I wont hold my breath.

 

[insidious_calm]

You just can't see it I guess...

You see I've been around long enough to see my share of things in life. I've been on the recieving end of a "mistaken identity" by some hysterical woman with mental problems. The end result was a broken nose and a split lip as I tried several times to beat up the trunk lid of a sherriffs car with my face after I lacerated my wrists with handcuffs. It was "my fault" you see. Walking down the road is a serious crime here. No they didn't pay the ER bill. In fact, the sheriff(who was a drunk and later brought up on felony charges and forcibly removed from office related to missing guns, drugs, and money) got hostile with me when I went to file a complaint. I quote "How DARE YOU file a complaint against my deputies! They're out there 'just doing their jobs responding to a complaint'" as he lunged up from his chair and nearly over his desk. Man that sounds familiar, "were just doing our jobs out here.." blah, blah.

You are wholly mistaken in your assumption that 9 out of 10 are corrected. I'd say it's more like 1 out of 10, and then only because shyster, shyster, shyster, and son think it's worth their while. And I've been through the local citizens academy, on ride alongs, and even applied to VOLUNTEER to do your job for free! Of course I was politely declined because I "had previously recorded complaints against the department that would result in a conflict of interest". That and I wouldn't say that I would not give another cop a ticket. Go figure.

You see, I am the average joe. I have no criminal record, I have a CHL, I'm a father of 3, I volunteer in my community, and a myriad of other everyday joe things. I've seen the good the bad and the ugly in our local LEO'S, and lately I'm not impressed. If you want that to change then YOU need to take action to do it. Stop supporting, defending, or looking the other way when "one of your own" is wrong. Tear down the "blue wall". Until then you will remain under this microscope and you will bear the brunt of our dissent.


I.C.


Edited to add: [cynic] I forgot, I'm just a criminal who hasn't been caught YET.[/cynic]

 

[Michigander]

Seems as neither of us have numbers, yet you have the liberally biased media on your side, so it must be true.

I am trying to ascertain the facts and the liberally based media (I guess you mean the internet links I provided) is all I have.

All I am saying is that we do not try for a no-knock every time a warrant is issued...

I don't recall anyone saying you did.

...felony warrants in and of themselves are rare in the grand scheme of things, and no-knocks even rarer...believe me, I know this.

I (and someone else) have posted the story about the 13,000 warrants and that the vast majority of them being no-knocks in NYC. So I assume you are not an LEO in NYC, right? OK. Obviously it would depend on where you work, rural, city, suburban, etc. Since all the various police forces are not keeping records, your experience may or may not be the norm accross the country. It certainly isn't the norm in NYC!

You will not be convinced, as you are set in your "personal accountability" guise for anarchy, and are convinced we are all jack booted nazi minions of some great state evil....as neither will I, as I accept the truth.

I am for personal accountability to some extent. Isn't everybody? Well, except for the left libs!
I do not want anarchy. I want a Constitutional Republic as set forth by our Founding Fathers. It really isn't too much to ask.
I do not see all LEO's as jack booted nazi minions (note: you brought up the nazis) of some great state evil. But some are. I suppose you do not beleive any are, correct?
As for the truth, without facts, there is no truth, there is only perception. Then again, perception is truth and we know what most who have posted on this subject think about no-knocks.

Rough men are to be dealt with in rough ways...if you dont like this, and this somehow troubles your fragile sensibilities, then Im sorry.....

Yes. Sometimes those rough men are the ones dealing with innocent people. If you don't like this, and this somehow troubles your fragile sensibilities, then I'm not sorry..... because it should trouble you.

 

[liliysdad]

See, therein lies the problem...the "brunt of your dissent" makes no never mind to me. I do my job, for free as you put it, at the moment, and I do it well. I get a lot more "thank yous" than "****yous'". I go home at night to my family, alive and well, and all is good. I see people on boards like this, and am thankful you are a small minority.

 

[gyp_c2]

hello...

I'm curious about the ...

In a court of law, yes they are innocent. We cannot afford that luxury, and to think we can is foolish.

...and then this...

As much as it irks you, officer safety is still number one. Our lives are no less important than yours, and arguably more important than the lives of certain subjects upon which such warrants are executed.

If you could expand on what you mean here as well...

I would be willing to bet that nine out of ten times the house is repaired, or at least reparations made. If we injure a suspect in the process of detainment..we pay for the bill at the ER.....no difference. Of course, you would never hear about such things, now would you?

...I know this is getting heated, I'm just not sure if that's how you really meant this or if you'd care to get into the details of who the "we" might be that actually "pays" and and the "Our lives" ...etc...

Thanks...