Right to defend your home?

The officers withdrew after exchanging gunfire. They called out for anyone inside the residence to come out and it took almost 30 minutes before the wife and child were out of the house. Not knowing how many more possible shooters were inside the house, they sent in the robot. I don't think that is the same as "standing around"

Click to expand...

I understand what they did and it was probably legally defensible, but i'm saying it was morally wrong to leave him in there. If it meant putting themselves or the other occupants in danger to finish clearing the house they should have done it. imo it is their job to put their lives in danger to serve the public and they clearly have no problem putting civilian lives in danger.

the shooting isn't what bothers, I understand mistakes happen, to me its what happened after that bothers me. any amount of time spent not doing what is necessary to get help to that guy, and to me waiting 30 minutes for a robot falls in this category, is morally unjustifiable.

many on here have said it. No knock warrants are dangerous for both parts.
if i was the Marine. i would have done what he did. if i was a swat member i likely would have fired.
perhaps make all no knock warrants use only less then lethal weapons.
i.e flash bang. riot shot guns, tazers.
that in it self might persuade the police to seek only knock warrants.

This wasn't an "arrest" it was an execution. I, for one, have a real problem with what happened.

Click to expand...

Has it come to this? The police officers in this case obtained a warrant and served it at 9am with sirens blaring. They knocked on the door and announced their presence. Even then the guy met them with a rifle. They should have shot him. The 4th and 2nd Amendments don't give us the right to point a gun at cops in the legal pursuit of their duties. And it doesn't require officers to check to make sure the rifle pointed at their heads is off "safe" before defending themselves.

If the homeowner seriously thought a dozen armed men on his porch in the middle of the morning were likely to be criminals he was probably going to meet a violent end sometime. The guy is very lucky his testosterone poisoning didn't get his family killed that morning, too.

BTW: if something is legally defensible, it is by definition moral...as morals are the rules set by the society; the laws that spell out legality. It is a common confusion of morals and ethics

Click to expand...

That assumes the people making the laws agree with the people in the society. In many cases, the laws are made by the people in power. Society be damned. I think this is one of those cases.

A veteran at home with his family was killed by police because they thought he might have drugs. This may be legal, but it is not moral.

Twiki357 said:

According to the latest news reports, the warrants were issued based on a tip. The murdered ex-Marine had no criminal record and (At least as so far as is known) was not involved in ANY criminal activity.

So far, it appears that the warrant was issued based on erroneous information by an unnamed informant without any preliminary investigation or verification. I only wish that the judges who sign these warrants could be held liable for their conduct and be financially responsible to reimburse the taxpayers for the lawsuit that will result.

Click to expand...

Maybe you should re-read the fourth ammendment. Warrants cannot be issued on "tips." They need to be issued based on probable cause, and they must be signed by a judge.

This ex-marine was not "murdered." The police obviously announced themselves, and he still stood there with a gun pointed at them.

Oh, as for him shooting at the LEOs, some of the news reports are saying that his weapon was not only unfired, but the safety was still on.

Click to expand...

I don't know why anyone continues to post this. It is utterly irrelevant. We do not, ourselves, claim that we may only shoot in self-defense if we've verified that the attacker's safety is off -- or indeed until AFTER he's fired -- and neither do we expect that the police must wait to be actually shot at, or to know for certain that he's deactivated the safety on his gun before firing on a suspect pointing a firearm at them.

This ex-marine was not "murdered." The police obviously announced themselves, and he still stood there with a gun pointed at them.

Click to expand...

There has been a LOT of speculation going on in this thread (and elsewhere, that has gotten dragged into this thread). A great deal of it has been found to be wrong. But the truth is we don't know exactly what details may have informed the decisions made by all parties on both sides of this event.

One of the major themes of speculation here is that the deceased was a man of exemplary moral character, obvious through his clean criminal record, who was utterly surprised to be awoken by a police raid and who could never have expected to find police officers wanting to search his premises. Therefore he surely prepared to fire on them in the mistaken belief that they were criminal home invaders.

[Unfounded Speculation Alert:]

But ... if I lived as part of a physically, and one assumes socially, close circle of extended family and friends, who came and went at my house regularly, and (as searches of the other properties that morning give us strong reason to believe) who are involved in narcotics trafficking/distribution, I think it is reasonable to assume that I'd know or at least suspect that they were so involved.

If I know or suspect that these people (my brother, close associates, etc.) are dealing drugs, and they are regularly visiting my home, and I theirs, it would be probably wise for me to think of unfortunate events like police officers detaining and arresting my family members (and maybe me too), and searching their homes (maybe mine too) as likely to happen. These things come with the territory of drug involvement.

(As do violent encounters with OTHER folks involved in the drug business ... which adds an interesting possible wrinkle to what happened.)

If I'm wise and aware, I believe I should be thinking ahead of time about how to deal with very animated meetings with law-enforcement officers -- because they are very likely to occur, given my family's activities.

IF all of those things are true, when men in black outfits with "POLICE" written all across them arrive in very noisy vehicles and bang on my door -- what should I do? If I decide to grab my rifle and say something macho like, "I've got something for you!" ... what could that say about me?

[/Unfounded Speculation Alert]

I only write this because it's been nagging me all morning. We've assumed at every turn that this man was not only uninvolved with the "family business" but unaware of it and squeaky clean. And, that his actions were the result of a sleep-befuddled misunderstanding of what was happening as he could have had no possible reason to suspect that the police would ever come knocking on his door.

That may be true. It is one possible reality that could be supported by the facts of what happened. It isn't the only one. We've flocked to the deceased's posthumous defense assuming our best-case beliefs about his position are true -- putting our own lily-white innocent, upstanding selves in his place. We may be wrong.

Jose Geruena was one of three men (along with his brother and an associate) listed on the warrant. It is absolutely possible that this may have been a completely legitimate search, that he was implicitly involved in criminal enterprise, and that he resisted what he believed was a totally legitimate arrest proceeding. The facts that he had no prior record and that no drugs were found in his home don't elilminate that possibility, at all.

We don't really know why he grabbed his gun or what he thought was happening, or whether he would indeed have killed men he knew to be police officers. Speculation is a hugely two-edged sword.

Just go to you tube and search "police abuse". This isn't an isolated incident, this is a pattern of behavior nationwide.

grigg is backing away from this one as the truth comes out and his opportunity to make money fades. all the fun is in the beginning when you vcvan posture in the factuakl vacum. heck even balko is hedging his bet

http://www.kgun9.com/story/14742824/swat-raid-deadly-force-justified-when-serving-search-warrant

legal opinion general one not specific to this case

http://www.kgun9.com/story/14743460/closer-look-at-three-other-homes-involved-in-swat-raids


some sparse info on other houses raided


http://www.fox11az.com/news/local/Pima-County-Sheriff-releases--122746649.html


and it would appear these folks are seeing tapes balko hasn't posted .... yet

It shows a very intense scene including the gunfire that killed Jose Guerena.

Loud sirens could be heard on the audio tape produced by PCSD As members of the SWAT team approach the Guerena home at around 9:30 the morning of May 5.

Police open the door, police open the door.

Once the door wasn't opened, the team breached the door three minutes later.

A few seconds after that, shots were fired.

Back up get him out, get back, get back give me a gun up here. I'm out.

Moments later, the SWAT team describes what happened when they started firing shots.

Who shot back?
All of us did. Hector went down and I didn't know if he was hit our not. I kept shooting to get him out.

At one point, Vanessa Guerena Jose's wife is seen walking close by the door, but then she leaves. The SWAT team tries to get her to come out.

We've got medical attention and paramedics out here to help you guys. We need everybody out of the house.

Vanessa eventually comes out and you can hear the fear in her voice as she is yelling in the background.

Come on, come here. We will get your baby, come here.
No, no you going to shoot me.
Come here.

The SWAT team got the little boy out and by 10:30, the team confirmed that Jose was dead.

Heretic said:

Just go to you tube and search "police abuse". This isn't an isolated incident, this is a pattern of behavior nationwide.

Click to expand...

"This?" "This" is part of a pattern of behavior? Exactly what is? Announced, daytime, apparently lawful execution of a search warrant at the (correctly identified and located) home of a suspected member of a narcotics gang? Not sure I see that as a problem, exactly.

Or a pattern of lawfully entering officers and shooting to death a suspect in their investigation who -- we have no clear reason to believe was not -- was resisting arrest/search by attacking them with a rifle? Again, this may have been a tragic mistake. Or this may have been an instance of someone who believed their misdeeds had caught up with them and chose to shoot it out rather than be taken into custody. We just don't know. We should NOT be passing judgment.

To say " go to you tube and search 'police abuse'" as though the random ravings of random anti-authority types (and maybe normal, sane people too, who knows?) have anything worthwhile to say about this incident is absurd.

anti drug war

Click to expand...

This isn't a question of the legitimacy of the war against drugs -- it doesn't really matter what crime the officers were investigating, they had their warrant and appear to have been investigating a suspected violation of standing US law -- and THR is absolutely NOT the place where the debate over that issue will be held.

ETA: Seems the message wasn't clear. DO NOT DEBATE THE "WAR ON DRUGS." That isn't a THR topic. Take that debate to APS or elsewhere.

Heretic said:

Just go to you tube and search "police abuse". This isn't an isolated incident, this is a pattern of behavior nationwide.

Click to expand...

Yes...there are probably 100 videos on youtube of police abuse (all of which only capture what the camera sees and not the whole story), yet there are 1,000,000 LEO's in the US. So that means 9,999 out of every 10,000 cops does things the right way.

Could there be more that are bad? Yes, but as stated, the videos on youtube only capture what the camera sees, and not the whole story, so not every one of those is a cop abusing his power.

as a former LEO, and now nurse I find the SWAT teams actions reprehensible! Communication is a two way street. Mr Guerena was NOT informed of the police. Yes it was announced while he was asleep. I would have reacted the same(obviously he was a night shift worker)if I had worked all night, and awakened to screaming and glass breaking. It was MURDER, because they didn't adequately clear the residence, and let the paramedics do their work adding insult to injury so to speak. If an LEO was down they'd have had the medics in there. People are supposed to be innocent til proven guilty. Mr Jose Guerena was judged and sentanced without due process.
ll

there is not a million LEOS in the US FYI

martialartsblackbelt said:

there is not a million LEOS in the US FYI

Click to expand...

Actually, there are over 700,000...close enough

lloveless said:

as a former LEO, and now nurse I find the SWAT teams actions reprehensible! Communication is a two way street. Mr Guerena was NOT informed of the police. Yes it was announced while he was asleep. I would have reacted the same(obviously he was a night shift worker)if I had worked all night, and awakened to screaming and glass breaking. It was MURDER, because they didn't adequately clear the residence, and let the paramedics do their work adding insult to injury so to speak. If an LEO was down they'd have had the medics in there. People are supposed to be innocent til proven guilty. Mr Jose Guerena was judged and sentanced without due process.
ll

Click to expand...

You must not have read the other posts on this thread. If you are a former LEO, you should know that paramedics would not come into this scene, even if it was a cop that was down. It is not the LEO's responsibility to give him adequate time to wake up because he works night shift. They went to the door during the day, and they knocked and announced.

Innocent until proven guilty is in court. This was a search warrant, which was signed by a judge, and according to reports, he was pointing a gun at swat officers when they entered.

Maybe we should start a thread asking how many people on THR would check the safety of the gun someone is pointing at them and the criminal record of that person before shooting at the person. It would make hypocrites out of a lot of the critics on this thread.

so AVS11054, whos at fault here? its not a no harm no foul situation. a Marine, Father, Man is dead.

martial arts -

I would say the guy who pointed a gun at the cops is the one that is at fault.

During a briefing before the warrants were served, records show, detectives told SWAT team members the two Guerena brothers and Celaya were associated with a double homicide related to a home invasion.

Click to expand...

9:33 a.m., Jose Guerena's house, 7100 block of South Redwater Drive. SWAT team members announce themselves, then knocked open the front door. Shots are fired and Jose is killed. His wife, Vanessa, and their 4-year-old son were not shot.

Click to expand...

Jose Guerena, 26, his older brother, Alejandro Guerena, and Jose Celaya - a relative by marriage - were listed as suspects in an investigation of drug trafficking and home invasions, records show. Warrants were served at homes owned by Jose Guerena; Bertha Guerena, Jose's mother; and two homes owned by Jose and Graciela Celaya.

Click to expand...

Here is the link to all of the above quotes http://azstarnet.com/news/local/crime/article_087950ff-b798-5fc2-baba-37c7c7d9fd6b.html


The police did everything right it seems. A warrant signed by a judge, went to the house at 9:30 am (well past the 6:30 am requirement for a daytime search warrant), they were fully decked out in SWAT gear that identified them as police officers, and they knocked and announced (they even sounded their sirens, which is not even a requirement when serving a warrant).

What more would you have liked them to do? Who do you think is at fault, since it is not a "no harm no foul"? You are right that a Marine and father is dead, but according to reports, maybe also a violent criminal.

You've got to decide whether or not you plan to shoot policemen.

If your house gets raided by the police, you have no way of knowing whether or not it is the police or impostors, so your plan will apply the same to both.

Make no mistake about it, and no effort to call it something besides what it is, if you plan to throw away your life 'defending' your home against the authorities.

Obviously, you can analyze facts to realize that the odds are, if you get raided, it's the real police, but since when do people really pay any attention to that sort of thing? Did you buy a bullet-proof vest before you bought a gun to carry around?

The law, the judge, the officer that asked for the warrant, just to start off.
any one of us would have done the same thing the the marines shoes.
if it turns out hes a violent criminal does that give the police the right to execute him?
hmmm seems to me thats the courts and corrections job.
since the police were acting with in the law and their intentions were good. it dosent matter right?

and and right after the warrant was sealed so we dont know what it says other then the act it self shows the cops covering something up.

any one of us would have done the same thing the the marines shoes.

Click to expand...

Any one of us would grab our AR when the police come knocking at our door with a search warrant?

if it turns out hes a violent criminal does that give the police the right to execute him?

Click to expand...

Execute him? So then you don't believe people have the right to defend themselves when they have guns pointed at them?

right after the warrant was sealed so we dont know what it says other then the act it self shows the cops covering something up.

Click to expand...

Sealed or not, it still has to have a judge's approval that probable cause exists. Do you believe the judge is in cahoots with PCSO?

I don't see why the term "execute" or "execution" or "murder" is constantly being brought up. Is it sad that the young man died, yes. Put yourself in the officer's position. You enter a house, you face a threat with an armed person, at that point it is your life or theirs, or the life of your teammates versus the armed resistance. The police acted based upon how they were trained to act.

The resident acted upon how he felt he should have acted, based on previous experience. Hindsight is 20/20 applies here, and it appears that so does armchair quarterback. If you were the police involved would you have done differently? Can anyone honestly answer that question who hasn't been trained for a situation like this or had the experience of a situation like this?

You are right that a Marine and father is dead, but according to reports, maybe also a violent criminal.

Click to expand...

Further, maybe a man who mistakenly thought he was under attack from criminal attackers, but maybe a man who had reason to fear arrest and decided willfully to resist with a deadly weapon.

We just don't know the whole story, but we're being wrapped around the little fingers of those who make money off of, get web hits off of, or just enjoy making the most of our anti-authoritarian outrage.

I'd really like to see some of these anger-mongers and sowers of vitriol come back to their blogs (or threads like this one) and say, "Wow, I apologize. I was WAAAY off. Let me set the record straight."

Won't happen, but that would be cool to see.