A discourse on No-Knock Warrant reform?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Donald Scott was suspected of growing hundreds of pot plants suspended in the trees about his 200 acre ranch. They broke into his home with no notice in the middle of the night and sent him to the Promised Land. No-knock warrants are to preserve evidence that may be destroyed while waiting for knowledgable consent or knocking and waiting for a response.

In the case of Donald Scott, they found nothing. What they accomplished was nothing more than the death of Donald Scott. How he was, in their minds, going to destroy several hundred pot plants in the time it took to answer the door in broad daylight I will never understand. So they decided that a midnight raid would be better.

I am in possession of one of the few copies of the Ventura County District Attorney's Office reports on the death of Donald Scott. It was the determination of the DA that the police went there with the express intention of seizing, for forfeiture, the Trail's End Ranch. They had even done an appraisal of the property prior to the raid. They even had a map showing other properties in the area and what they sold for.

When they crashed into the house his wife, Frances, was in the kitchen. She started screaming "Don't shoot me!" and Donald came to her aid holding a .357 magnum revolver. The police started screaming "Put down the gun, Donald!" and when he started to comply, they shot him to death. Now, for all of you here, pay attention to this next sentence!!! The DA's office found that Donald Scott was complying with the orders of the police; but in doing so, lowered his weapon in a manner that caused the muzzle of the weapon to come to bear on the officers so the officers were justified in shooting because they feared for their lives!!!!

There's that "officer safety" thing again.

The man who shot Donald Scott is the same man who started the bogus investigation in the first place. Why was the investigation started? Because Frances had been seen spending $100 bills on Rodeo Drive in Beverly Hills. Now why would the wife of a millionaire ever do such a thing???

The man who shot Donald Scott and started the investigation is still a police officer.
 
Your algrebra example is not appropriate. I can't tell you how my automatic transmission does all the things it does, but I know many of the things that show it is not operating properly.

Any article showing a no knock gone bad is simple proof to me that no matter how complicated the system is, the system is outputting garbage far too often.

As for the original question, hold everyone involved responsable.

Lets say someone reads the street numbers wrong, all who enter that dwelling are guilty of crimes. From breaking and entering to brandishing weapons, they broke the law. No one should be above the law. And I want to remind all that many states have stiffer penalties for criminals who commit a crime while wearing body armor.

But lets involve all, from the judge on down. And lets say the wrong address is typed on the warrent and someone inside that house gets shot for defending themselves.

Whoever did the shooting is guilty of murder and everyone who planned it is guilty of conspiracy to commit murder. And probably some other things as well, such as discharging a firearm inside city limits.

I don't really care about the reasons for the drug war, I don't care if it is for children. I don't care if police put their life on the line doing their job.

All need to obey the law. And until a police officer speeding on the road without their lights on is written up for breaking the law we are in animal farm where all animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.

The laws of the land either apply to all, or they apply to none.
 
Well said biere

The only caveat I would add is to make sure that the laws make sense before enforcing them. We have way too many pointless feelgood bs laws to contend with.

The point about people not being held accountable for mistakes is one of the root causes for the resentment and anger many feel. The govt refusal, and at times even cover-ups, of mistakes makes a lot of people think the govt has nothing but contempt for the common people. Even if the feeling is unfounded it is still there. Untill a great deal of effort is made by the govt to correct this the resentment and distrust will continue to grow.

Cynical mode on: Don't hold your breath.
 
The thing I think most folks fail to realize is that there is a TON of scrutiny that goes into getting and serving one of these warrants. They are very very rare and when they are used it is in the most extreme of cases where there is a known threat.
Click to expand...

So.....

This makes no knock warrants even more reprehensible.

A no knock is justified for 622 bucks and some pot? THAT is a KNOWN threat?

Some guy growing pot plants in the trees?

That is a KNOWN threat?

No knocks, BY YOUR OWN WORDS, are a disaster waiting to happen.

It's simple. We have many examples of ones gone awry, and you say they are very rare and used in only the most extreme of cases. They must almost all go wrong, then....or maybe they are not so rare?
 
Zak, fix: well put, and I agree with you completely.

biere: I agree -- probably the best mode of action at this time (and the most likely to be adopted) is to make sure that police are as accountable for their misdeeds as any other citizen. As I don't see no-knock entry laws going away any time soon (let alone drug laws and gun laws), this would be a great first step.
 
Nightfall: The story that started this was not an example of a NO Knock warrant. They got the suspect to open the door under the guise of an officer posing as a maintenance man. That is not a no knock. In other examples cited, people assosciate no knocks with midnight raids...time of day has nothing to do with no knock, they can occur at any time. As I said, we would prefer an early morning raid because naked sleepy people are less likely to fight...but it can happen when it needs to happen. I think people believe that any warrant where the Ofc kicks down the door is a no knock, but that is not so. If the officers knock and announce first, it is a standard warrant...if they announce and go, it is no knock. I will put it this way. In the last two years that I have been in DC, my agency has served 0 no knock warrants anywhere in the country. Other agencies in the DC area have served a few that I know about, but less than 10 that I can recall... Think about that, DC Metro, Fairfax County, PG County, and Rockville Md. That is a LARGE area with serious numbers of people. That should tell you how rare they are.
 
Fed DC:

While YOU might not be aware of many, in your area, the patent fact is that there are too many being performed erroniously. And I tend to agree with the idea here that they (NKWs) actualy RAISE the level of danger, both for officers and those being so-served. The evidence shows as much (there are enough cases we've heard of where things "went wrong" to justify my statement).

And before you ask: no, I'm not in law enforcement. Before you start on how "Hunter doesn't know what has to be gone through", I have a question: can you explain (in detail) exactly what chemical reactions happen in the body when cocain is snorted? If not, then, by your own logic, you shouldn't be saying anything about drugs being bad, huh?
 
its simple..really;make everyone responsable for their own actions.I dont include lawsuits because ultimatly,the money paid does not come out of the officers pockets who showed up at the wrong address,it comes out of the taxpayers pockets.murder is murder no matter whom commits it.assault & battery,destruction of private property..no lawsuit.. just fire the responsable persons and let a jury decide their fate as they would ANY citizen who commits similiar offences...zak..I know louis katona and remember when that incident happened,he is a good cop and a very honest man...sad to say it can happen to anyone and until people are held liable criminally for mistakes then I dont see it ever being changed.
 
Fed DC

having read your requirements for a warrent, be it a knock or no-knock, I was reminded of an earlier thread here on THR, of the woman who had a high power bill and a drug dog may have hit on her trash on trash day.

Now your post the requirements for a said warrent and seems the LEO's in this case should by all rights be working for her since they seem to not have followed the rules as according to what you have stated.

IMHO there is never a need for a no knock warrent, at any givin time there will be a chance for the police to raid the house when no one is at home, if they are concerned about destruction of evidence: and at same time they are doing a no-body-home raid other officers could be apprehending the criminal out in public with the standard "I'm pulling you over because you crossed the white line"

Why does someone have to be home in order to conduct a search warrent?
Is it part of the law? Seems it would be safer to conduct the warrent when nobody home for both parties : the home owner and the police.


just my two cents which is probaly worth less than that.
 
Sorry, I think enforcing every law on the books is just the lesson this country needs.

And I would take it to the extreme since all men and women are created equal and therefore should be treated equally until they show that they do not deserve that type of treatment.

Let's play with ohio's ccw rules for motor vehicle carry. If I get my ccw I am expected to put my gun in a locked box while I am in the car or the gun can be exposed on my person while I am in the car. And this is a bit vague but so is the actual law.

I don't really feel that a police person on duty should be treated any differently. I don't think a judge or anyone should be treated any differently.

Somehow I suspect that rather than have all police folks follow the laws I am expected to follow, the law would change such that I could have a concealed firearm in my car on my body.

I really dislike the idea that a judge considers it "his" courtroom, or that they can carry in the building and I can not.

If all laws were enforced I also expect judges would inform a jury about their ability to nullify laws.

And by enforcing all laws and then tossing dumb ones out, I suspect the creators of some of these silly laws would not create dumb laws.

What the folks who make the laws and enforce the laws have forgotten is that they work for the common man.

I do not know how to do it, but all must be held accountable to all the laws on the books.

Money does not make you able to skirt the law, your job or who you know does not allow you to skirt the law. Nothing allows you to skirt the law.

I have no clue how to get the country there, but the no knock question is simply the start of the above concept that all are accountable for their actions.
 
Let me add one other small caveat - brought to mind by one or two posts ...... in this day and age where surveillance techniques can it seems be ultra sophisticated .. is it essential to have to implement a NKW or even a standard warrant ... at the door.

Surely if timing is planned then the perps can be apprehended on exit or entry to premises ... and then said premises search under a standard search warrant. The whole place can be surrounded too .. to minimize a chance of others making good an escape.

I'd say anything is preferable to anyone having to stand the other side of a door ..... not knowing what lies within regarding hostilities .... not to mention the possibilities for hasty reactions and dead people ... who might be simply trying to ''defend the home'' ...... even a bad guy is likely to choose to repel boarders, whether he knows they are LE or not.

Just ruminating!:)
 
FedDC
The standards that you've put forth seem to be quite reasonable; however, it's quite obvious that most warrants don't go through such a process. If they did, then these types of threads wouldn't have to exist. Instead it's become almost common to hear about search warrants going bad and the police not finding anything, or the officers simply raiding the wrong address.
 
As to knock vs. no knock, didn't a judge rule that 20 seconds was enough time to wait around after announcement on a standard warrant?
 
What steps could be taken to limit the abuse of said warrants?
Click to expand...

How about jurors standing on priciple (do we still have principles?) and simply refusing to convict any person that ends up in court having been subjected to a no-knock warrant?

Since judges can't render a "judgement not withstanding the verdict" in criminal cases as they can in civil cases, all it takes is one juror to blow the wheels off the case. Similar to jury nullification, but since most judges go rabid if they hear "the law is wrong" from a jury, I see no need to elaborate on why a vote was cast as "not guilty." Worst case it's a mistrial or is appealed.

Enough slam-dunk cases walk away and cops, DA's and judges are going to identify that the common factor is the "no-knock" and decide they'd better take a different approach if they want a conviction.

Doesn't do much for a wrong address raid or the suspect gets dumped, but it's a start.
 
"Do you even know what is required to obtain a no knock warrant?"

Well, yes. I've been a lawyer for 30 years and a prosecutor for much of that time. The rules and principles regarding search warrents and "no knock" entries are not rocket science. They can be mastered by police officers and by other non-lawyers (what some of you refer to a "civilians").

The "only cops can know ..." debating tactic is a refuge for those who cannot defend their position and a sure killer of further conversation. I'm certain that is exactly what many of the posters here would like to have occur.

But it is obvious that the calm, articulate civilian posters aren't going to let the LEO's run away from serious conversation. That's why this issue keeps reoccuring on CopTalk.

P. S. I'm willing to disclose my profession and location. I find it hard to take seriously posers (pardon, "posters") who claim to be LEO's but submit empty profiles.
 
The problem with this discussion is going to be simple and is eximplified by Fix. Nobody on here with the exception of a few LEOs even knows what a no knock actually is or what it takes to obtain one. The fact of the matter is that those warrants are already almost impossible to get and have to have special authorization by the judge or in some cases judges. Even in a no knock situation, the PD will still be announcing their presence and will still be highly overt. The only thing that is different is the 10 seconds that you use to actually make entry. In a regular warrant, you stand there outside the door waiting on the suspect to kill you through the wall or door while in a No-Knock, you announce yourself and go in.

I am sure that this is going to be interesting...stand by for some serious BS about things that people know nothing about.
Click to expand...
Actually, no, I don't need to know, nor have a working understanding of, the engineering details of how automobile design has been enhanced to reduce injuries, nor know the procedures used to train the official drivers of those vehicles, in order to recognize and articulate that the fact that the official government drivers of those "safe" government vehicles are running over and killing innocent people, and that this is not acceptable.

Aside from saying that everything is hunky-dory, would you care to address the actual question, which was:
  • Innocent people are being killed accidentally by police.
  • No-knock warrants are involved in what seem to be the worst examples of these violations of constitutional rights.
  • As Justice Holmes said, "It is better that ten guilty men go free, than to convict one innocent man."
  • Obviously this applies 10-fold to police in ninja suits and hoods shooting people with automatic weapons in their bedrooms, as at least the convicted person has his day in court.
  • The police would obviously prefer not to kill innocent people. (Quite regardless of whether some people seem to think that this is only because the PR is bad.)
  • So how do we eliminate the unacceptable innocent deaths?
  • While, (for the purposes fo this discussion) retaining no-knock warrants.

BTW, I don't know if you noticed, but your assertion that no-knock warrants are usually the result of extensive, possibly months long research and planning, fatally wounds the idea of any possible lack of responsibility on the part of the police when they show up "accidentally" at the wrong address and kill someone.

Dex }:>=-
 
The following article from Atlantic Monthly is germane to this discussion. It presents an discussion of analysis of 4th amendment problem with search, seizure, and search warrants by Akhil Reed Amar, a Yale Law School professor who has written several highly original analyses of the Bill of Rights. [Therefore he probably doesn't fit FedDC's criteria for having an opinion.]

Amar's analysis is essentially this: In framing the 4th amendment, the founding fathers did not intend for search warrants to be issued for every search performed by police, because search warrants confer immunity from prosecution, and the founding fathers were quite enthusiastic about suing the police for trespass if a search or seizure was unreasonable. The exclusionary principle is bad, because it a) lets guilty persons go free, and the more guilty, the greater reward for successfully using it, and b) because focusing on probable cause rather than reasonableness of the search or seizure has eliminated most recourse for damages or rights violations under the 4th amendment. Thus, more guilty people get off, and more innocent people are harmed without recourse.


Rescuing Search and Seizure

or here Rescuing Search and Seizure

Dex }:>=-
 
So, basically what I am hearing is that "We don't care if we don't know what we are talking about...we're going to pass judgment anyway..." That's some great logic. How do you debate an issue with someone that doesn't care to know the facts or doesn't want to accept the truth? How many people on here have ever served a warrant or had to stand outside the house of an armed suspect waiting for HIM to decide whether to kill you or not. I have and I know from EXPERIENCE what it feels like to stand in that kill zone outside a door. Are there mistakes? Absolutely and the only way to ensure that there are zero mistakes it to completely do away with all forms of law enforcement and move to anarchy. The only people that do not make mistakes are the ones that do not do anything. Personally, I am willing to live with a few mistakes in order to have a peaceful society where I can feel safe to go see a movie or take my nephew out for ice cream. There are no perfect people...outside a few that seem to reside solely on here... and to think that we should totally do away with a valuable tool in LE simply because every once in a great while a mistake is made is just silly.

Have any of the folks complaining so loudly ever tried to read house numbers in the dark while rolling up blacked out on a crack house? Oh yeah, they intentionally take all the numbers off their houses to confuse the police. Add in the fact that in many neighborhoods, the fine upstanding citizens begin shooting at the police randomly as they drive into the neighborhood and you might be able to get a glimpse of how difficult it can be to just find the correct location, much less arrive and serve the warrant.

As to the detail of my profile, my life is my own business. Everybody that reads my posts knows what I do and where I do it. You will not see me post my full name, address, SSN, agency contact info etc. on any public forum bc of the numbers of absolute cop haters like the ones that are so endearing to this forum.
 
"We don't care if we don't know what we are talking about...we're going to pass judgment anyway..."
Click to expand...
That's not what you're hearing from me. If you'd like to respond to my articulate and well-reasoned essay, please do so.

Absolutely and the only way to ensure that there are zero mistakes it to completely do away with all forms of law enforcement and move to anarchy.
Click to expand...
We are talking about no-knock raids, and that is fallacy known as a false dichotomy.
 
By the way Dex, 30 seconds in harms way is an eternity. I am guessing that you have never been under fire in the Military or LE, otherwise you would know how long a few seconds can truly be and what a difference those few seconds can make when it comes to winning the fight and going home alive. As to the article...if I skimmed it correctly, it looks like he is advocating a weakening of the exclusionary rule and lowering the standard needed for the police to search your house to a "Reasonable" standard that would be decided by the police, not the court... I can't see a lot of folks, especially the ones on this forum supporting that. Yes, in some cases the standard of PC is ridiculously high, moreso in cases where the judge wants you to name the exact item you are going to seize and its exact location (as if we have ESP) and then if and only if you can do that will issue the warrant. PC is not that bad of a standard.
 
Ok Zak, here is my reply. Everything you described in your post could happen the exact same way, whether we knock or not. If you aren't going to believe that it is the police when we say "Police" then the few seconds that we wait prior to kicking in your door are not going to help. Just bc we do not knock does not mean that we leave the flashlights you describe at home, nor does it mean that we do anything differently once we are inside so many of the issues you address are going to be present in any type of warrant that is served at your location. I sympathize with your issues bc it is not uncommon for the various LE agencies to serve warrants around here and one may not even know what the other is doing. There have even been cases where the local PD was called to respond to a home invasion in progress (Neighbors called 911) when in reality a warrant was being served by a federal agency. As I said though, if you refuse to believe that the people in your house are police, it will not matter how they got there. If a warrant has any kind of threat assosciated with it at all, it is going to be served when the occupants are least likely to resist IE early morning. The only warrants that are served in broad daylight where you just walk up and knock with a couple of guys are admin warrants and a few court orders. To treat high risk warrants that way would be suicidal.


As to the theories about killing police officer because you believe the attempted arrest to be illegal...well, there is theory and there is reality. In theory, that works. In reality you will die violently and will not be viewed as a hero, but as a cop killer and that stigma will follow you and your family as your kids try to get jogs, join the military and apply for positions that require security clearances etc. Resisting arrest with force, lethal force even moreso, is the worst option. If the arrest is truly illegal, you will be on the positive end of a HUGE court settlement and will get all the free press you want to talk about evil JBTs. Legal and Illegal is best decided in court where nobody is going to get shot not in a hallway in your underwear with a glock.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
No-Knock Warrants
2 3
Replies
71
Views
2K
Art Eatman
A
F
  • Locked
US Supreme Court to decide SWAT No-Knock case
Replies
13
Views
1K
Michigander
M
A
  • Locked
from 12 April Cato Dauily Dispatch, an interesting read
Replies
1
Views
328
Leatherneck
L
Z
  • Locked
LEO no longer need a warrant to raid a home if they hear someone move inside! SCOTUS
Replies
8
Views
795
rbernie
rbernie
2
  • Locked
No knock-knock: real 'shock-and-awe' behind police raids
Replies
13
Views
956
LiquidTension
L
Back
Top