A No Knock Warrant Death

[primer]

Alright Average shooter. Please pay attention. 1st, Nobody here knows all of the facts. Including me. 2nd, I didn't say he was acting violently after using pot in any way. 3rd, I didn't say he was a violent criminal. But I give up. You win. congrats. Shooting someone without knowing who it is is the right move.

 

[average_shooter]

Primer, you yourself have said in other threads that you consider yourself to be "expendable" when it comes to defending your family. I commend that. Apparently this guy felt that way too.

I don't know exactly what the laws are in LA or where this guy's incident occurred, but where I live what matters is what the "victim" believed to be true at the time of the shooting. In this case, what would matter is what the homeowner believed to be true at the time, which was apparently that someone was making forceful entry with intent to do harm.

 

[jaholder1971]

Similar scenario happened in Topeka about 13 years ago.

No-knock warrant on a guy for possession with intent to sell. Guy was drunk, naked and not wearing his glasses when he shot at the cops beating down his door. Caught a cop in the armpit with a .38 slug, passed through both lungs and heart.

Is was 12 hours later before they "found" weed in the house, in a freezer.

Real truth came out during the trial:

Cops claimed they'd been in the house buying dope from the guy 3 times to get the warrant, turns out their snitch bought from his friends, in the house, during a party. Had they'd been in his apartment before they'd have known his apartment door opened outward, which is why their battering ram tore huge chunks out of the door instead of defeating the deadbolt.

Cops claimed they knocked, hollered POLICE and the guy started shooting. Defense had 20 (yes, I said 20) neighbors in the apartment complex tell the jury that they heard the cops beating the door to pieces, shooting then the cops screaming POLICE.

When the trial was over, they found the guy guilty of drug possession but cleared him of murder, royally pissing off the cops. Later, in appeals, it was found that the partner had lied to obtain the warrant.

2 Years ago, many of the same cops who beat down that door are now felons due to a corruption scandal in the narcotics squad.

 

[Just Jim]

So, by your very statement, the criminal will, fast or slow, get a gun if he/she wants it. So tell me why all of the non-criminals must be treated the same way and make it harder for them to obtain legal firearms.

There has to be a way to check for criminal background. In my state that takes about 15 minutes of my time. I don't mind waiting 15 minutes if it keeps the guns out of the hands of criminals. Would you rather they hand the criminals guns so you don't have to wait for yours:uhoh

Yup.
Mere possession and use of a substance or item should not, in and of itself be prohibited.

Really I don't care if you or anyone else uses drugs. Hey have at it. But the problem is too many people miss use drugs to the point they are not only a burden on society but a threat too.

Addicts do anything to keep up with their addiction, we all know that and have seen it.

How about to your kids?

Newp. My kids are legally and morally my responsibility; once they reach 18, no matter how I may dislike it, if they choose to ingest drugs (even alcohol) then that is their choice and I have no say. But, in this case, shouldn't there first be some kind of evidence or something that shows that this man was a terrible drug pusher and corrupter of children? If it's true that he had some marijuana for personal consumption, again, how does that justify the warrant service in that manner?

Who is going to sell drugs to your kids?? Are you there every minute of the day to protect them??

There isn't enough information to say what is with this guy and shooting a cop. The true story may never be known. Simple logic says that the cops made a mistake and got one of their own killed for a bag of pot. Something I wouldn't want to live with.

There is a strong relationship between guns and drugs and it is criminal behavior.

There is? How about all of those tens of thousands of people who use prescribed narcotics? How about the unknown number of legitimate medical-marijuana users in the (I think) ten states where it is legal? I guess since the feds still prohibit marijuana even for medical purposes, then I guess you're right -- they're criminals too.

To recieve drugs by prescription is legal as far as I know and under a doctors care to keep one from being an addict. Medical Marijuana is authorized under state law. The courts will have to figure out if Federal Law supercedes State law in this instance.

Till the law changes, it's the law

jj

 

[fireflyfather]

"I doubt there's a single addict in this country that had their addiction forced apoun them. "

Then you are dead wrong. Pimps regularly beat women and force them to take drugs in order to control them. Many of the women have absolutely no intention of becoming prostitutes or drug addicts, but find themselves unlucky enough to be under the control of a criminal. Maybe those victims aren't strong or smart, but they most definitely are not voluntary addicts. There are a LOT of women (and children) in the sex trade who are unwilling addicts. I think it'd be better for you to do a little thinking and a little research before you get so glib about things you don't know the first thing about.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Yes, there is a law against it. But it still happens. Does that mean that our government should just say oh well that didn't work and just let everyone do as they wish.

They did that with prohibition. Prohibition accomplished nothing other than making Joe Kennedy wealthy. People wanted booze whether or not it was "legal," so there was a black market to supply the demand. Back then the government was smart enough to admit they had messed up, and prohibition was repealed. Our current .gov doesn't have the sense to admit that the "war on drugs" is a losing exercise.

Until the police can guarantee with 100 percent certainty that a no-knock warrant will NEVER be served at an incorrect address, and will NEVER be served based on falsified information, they should ... not ... be ... allowed. Nor should so-called "knock & announce" warrants where the wait time is 20 seconds under circumstances when NO typical person might reasonably be expected to answer the door in 20 seconds.

 

[jaholder1971]

It is a strategy used to catch a criminal offguard. Get in before the subject has time to arm himself so that there is less of a chance that they have to kill him. And before he has a chance to destroy evidence that could convict him and keep him off of the streets so that he can't put drugs into the hand of our young people.

BOVINE SCATOLOGY!!!

No-knock raids and dynamic entry I have no problem with provided the guys they're after are wanted for violent activity or a fast reaction is needed to save a life, say in the case of a kidnapping or hostage situation.

Going after dope? Forget it. Wait the dealers out then hit them when they're not at home then nail the empty house. Then nail the dealer when he gets back from cashing his welfare check or buying chicken and waffles.

So the dope goes down the sewer before the cops get there, BFD. That's still dope off the streets. Since dealers usually work on credit with their distributors it doesn't take too much dope down a drain before the dealer's out of business.

 

[Travis Lee]

No, we do NOT know all the facts.

I'm still waiting to see the photo op of all the drugs confiscated in the raid. I'm still waiting to see the video of the "grow operation" which police were certain they would find.

I'm wondering why a suspect who shot a cop dead, wasn't even charged with the posession of even a misdemenor quantity of pot. Don't they usually pile on every last imaginable charge?

It's been a few days since this story hit the news and I still don't see follow up stories to suggest that this raid was obtained with any good valid evidence to begin with.

No matter how much some of you want to wave your "drugs are bad" flags, don't you want police to have something more than a perjured statement before they bash down YOUR door?

--Travis--

 

[Just Jim]

They did that with prohibition. Prohibition accomplished nothing other than making Joe Kennedy wealthy. People wanted booze whether or not it was "legal," so there was a black market to supply the demand. Back then the government was smart enough to admit they had messed up, and prohibition was repealed. Our current .gov doesn't have the sense to admit that the "war on drugs" is a losing exercise.

Like most of our wars, it was never fought as a real war. Just a police action. A real war would have stopped the flow at the sources. Like most government programs, the war on drugs is pure folly.

jj

 

[TAB]

you know I always have wondered why cops are worried about them flusing dope, I mean a simple pipe ballon in the clean out will catch every thing they send down the drain... sure seems alot simpler to do that then to risk peoples lifes going in.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

The cops apparently tried to announce their presence. Given that the guy may have been in a dead sleep and not heard the cops. That together with the dogs barking could have made it hard to hear the cops. The guy woke up startled and remembered that someone had broken into his garage, grabed his gun and ran to the door. Without knowing or asking who was beating his door in he opened fire. A cop died and this guy may go to jail for the rest of his life or lose his life because he didn't verify who was on the other side of the door.

I saw nothing in the report to suggest that the police "apparently tried to announce their presence." It is clear, however, that it was the middle of the night, when it's reasonable to expect that people in a house will be asleep. Even if the police knocked, how long did they wait after "trying to announce themselves"? 20 seconds? 30 seconds? How long does it take YOU to awaken from a dead sleep, register that there's someone knocking on your door, and get yourself to the door to answer it at 3:00 a.m.? Can YOU do it in 20 to 30 seconds?

Sorry, but despite the fact we're looking at the same facts I am forced to the opposite conclusion of yours. A police officer didn't die because this man didn't verify who was beating in his door at oh-dark-thirty. A police officer died because the police chose to execute a home invasion rather than serving a search warrant at a reasonable time of day and in a civilized manner.

Come on. Supposedly the guy had grow lights in the house. What's he going to do, flush them down the toilet when the cops knock on the door? Grow up.

 

[Vector]

No Knock warrant costs a cop his life over small amount of weed. If you storm into a home unidentified after hours do you seriously not expect to get shot?

According to the excerpt you posted, the police say they were not in the house. So to use the term "stormed into a home" may not be accurate. To me, the case will hinge on that more than anything else.

Playing devils advocate, you can ask this question instead;

If you shoot first and ask questions later and kill a LEO, do you honestly not expect to have the book thrown at you?

 

[ArmedBear]

fireflyfather, that's probably one of the stupidest posts I've ever seen.

While what you said may be true of "drugs", it has nothing to do with pot, any more than it has to do with cigarettes or beer.

 

[ArmedBear]

If you shoot first and asking questions later and kill a LEO, do you honestly not expect to have the book thrown at you?

I wasn't there. If nobody was in the guy's home, then that's true.

However, in my state, if someone breaks down my door, I am well within my specific legal rights to assume that he intends harm to me and/or my family, and I can legally use deadly force in self defense, immediately and without further ascertaining his intent.

That's California.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

But the cops felt they had probable cause since they had been watching the home since november. That's what I have read in the reports up to now. They had been watching the house. ... Probable cause supported by oath or affirmation. He was a pot smoker, fact. If the cops have been wathing him that long, they probably saw him buy pot or objects that could be used in the growth of pot. They then have someone inform them or the possibility or the fact that he was growing pot. They had what they considered probable cause.

Did you actually READ what you just wrote?

The police had been watching him since NOVEMBER. In other words, for a period of months. They could have served their little search warrant at any time. They could have been parked at the curb when he came home from work, and walked up to him as he was putting his key in the door. No way he could destroy evidence, or arm himself, under those circustances, right? Yet ... rather than act like civilized represntatives of a civilized law enforcement agency, they instead elected to execute a forceable entry in the dead of night, thus virtually guaranteeing that the resident wouldn't have any opportunity to figure out what was happening and react reasonably and peacefully.

IMHO I think he was FULLY justified in opening fire through the door, and I wish I could be sitting on his jury if the case goes to trial.

 

[primer]

Wow, I must have been sleeping when every cop on the planet became the bad guys. Like I said a number of times. What the cops did may or may not be right. I wasn't disputing that. And yes I do concider myself expendable when it comes to my family. But like I said before I would know who I was shooting at before I pulled the trigger. All I'm seeing is how the cop are always wrong and that's sad. Cops planted this and that. You are taking a couple of examples of the law not working out of text and using it to make your points. I don't believe all cops are like that. I think that there are still quite a few cop out there that do the job because they enjoy helping people and feel that it's their duty. I'm just amazed how many of you are jumping on the band wagon before knowing all the facts. The law isn't perfect and neither is the way it's implemented. I know it and so do alot of other people.

 

[gunsmith]

I am not now nor have I ever been LE

I know how to get uniforms, badges ,my old security
guard uniform fooled most LE and 99% of citizens (I invested my own money in the right tools for the job)
I could easily disguise myself as a cop.
There is nothing preventing a bad guy from doing the same.
No knocks and insane drug laws, end both now.

 

[230RN]

Well, time for me to post this 1763 quote from William Pitt in Parliament once again:

"The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the crown. It may be frail--its roof may shake--the wind may blow through it--the storm may enter, the rain may enter --but the King of England cannot enter --all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement."

Times change, huh?

 

[primer]

In the articles that I read it all happened around 10:00pm. But whatever, I can clearly see that the majority of people hear think that the guy was justified in what he did in every way and the cops were totally wrong. I understand that and repect your opinion. It's you rights. Carry on.

One more thing. Mr Blanca, you don't know me and don't know what I've been through in life. Throughout this whole deal I've tried not to get personal. You telling me to grow up wasn't called for. It's called respect for other people even if you don't agree with them.

 

[average_shooter]

Times change, huh?

Well, you know 9/11 changed everything...

 

[Vector]

Aguila Blanca wrote;

IMHO I think he was FULLY justified in opening fire through the door, and I wish I could be sitting on his jury if the case goes to trial.

While your comments about the LEO's choice of time to arrest him are well taken, I am surprised you feel he was justified in shooting through the door (assuming that is what happened). The end result is that one life is over, and the other might be ruined as well. I doubt he would do the same thing again if he had to do it over again, unless he is crazy.

`

 

[Sage of Seattle]

Not to get too off topic, but:

There has to be a way to check for criminal background. In my state that takes about 15 minutes of my time. I don't mind waiting 15 minutes if it keeps the guns out of the hands of criminals. Would you rather they hand the criminals guns so you don't have to wait for yours:uhoh

Well, for the vast majority of our history, no criminal background checks were necessary, so I still haven't seen a very legitimate reason for the fifteen minute wait in the first place, especially since it does nothing to curb criminals from obtaining the weapons anyway.

Really I don't care if you or anyone else uses drugs. Hey have at it. But the problem is too many people miss use drugs to the point they are not only a burden on society but a threat too.

Addicts do anything to keep up with their addiction, we all know that and have seen it.

Well, it's pretty common knowledge that cigarrettes are highly addictive and alcohol is addictive as well, yet there's very little to no crime involved in obtaining either of those items. Why? Because they are cheap and available and regulated. Opiates were available over the counter a hundred years ago, as well as cocaine (Coca-cola anyone?) yet I'm sure while there were problems, there certainly wasn't the kind of crime associated with the amazingly high profit incentives caused by illegal drugs today.

Who is going to sell drugs to your kids?? Are you there every minute of the day to protect them??

I'm not understanding what you're trying to say here. You asked a question and I answered it regarding my children and drugs.

There isn't enough information to say what is with this guy and shooting a cop. The true story may never be known. Simple logic says that the cops made a mistake and got one of their own killed for a bag of pot. Something I wouldn't want to live with.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. It is a tragedy any way you look at it. My only point is that the tragedy could have been more easily solved from the police officer's actions and not the homeowners.

To recieve drugs by prescription is legal as far as I know and under a doctors care to keep one from being an addict. Medical Marijuana is authorized under state law. The courts will have to figure out if Federal Law supercedes State law in this instance.

Huh? You will become physically (if not also psychologically) addicted to opiates if you take oxycodone for pain (for example) for more than a few weeks or so. Just being under a doctor's care does not make one immune and it has been my experience that most doctors really don't know the complexities of addiction when trying to balance it out with pain relief.

Medical marijuana is authorized under a few states' laws. The courts have already figured out if federal law supercedes state law in this instance. The feds continue to prosecute legitimate medical marijuana users across the country. Sad, but true.

Till the law changes, it's the law

Doesn't mean that it's a good law or a just law or an effective law, though does it?

 

[Cesiumsponge]

This is an example of why no-knocks are a huge liability. In the following case, the tables are turned and innocent people are maimed and dead. Primer keeps mentioning a positive ID on your target. I doubt the people involved in the debacle below will face any charges. I find it difficult to justify how definite positive IDs were made in a case that happened last month:

LIMA, Ohio (AP) - The Lima police chief says toys outside alerted officers to the possibility of children inside a home where a SWAT team member shot and killed a woman [single mother]and injured her 1-year-old son.

Police say last night's raid was to serve a search warrant targeting a man who lived at the northwest Ohio home.

Chief Greg Garlock says six children were inside.
Killed was 26-year-old Tarika Wilson. Family members say the boy is Sincere Wilson and he lost a finger and also was shot in a shoulder.

Tarika Wilson's sister says she was upstairs helping her children clean their bedrooms. Her daughter tells family the mother was holding her son and fell over him when she was shot.

So they knew specifically that there were children present inside at the time. That didn't make them reconsider kicking in doors and brandishing machine guns all over the place so now their mother is dead and they've shot a toddler.

http://www.local12.com/news/state/story.aspx?content_id=ac2aa96c-b217-4090-b8d0-6ded382a0a61
http://www.limaohio.com/story.php?IDnum=47620

The Lima SWAT police department webpage: http://www2.wcoil.com/~lpd/swat/swat.htm
They had an animated graphic of a mall ninja shooting you as a greeting. It has since been removed from the HTML but the image is still on their server: http://www2.wcoil.com/~lpd/swat/swat.gif

 

[LEO'S WIFE]

the real story

As I read this thread, it saddens my heart that nearly every one of you has based your opinion on an article from a newspaper which is notorious for its biased, liberal writings. I don't hold it against you because most of you are probably not from around here and do not read the Virginia Pilot, but haven't you learned by now that the media prints what it wants too, they write a story so that it will sell more newspapers. Really, the only people interviewed would be someone who knew the defendant.

Let me fill you in...the entry was not unannounced....they called out 4 TIMES!! And, yes, he did shoot them because someone had broken into his house the week before (it was not an attempted break in, they did break in) but the home invasion was not reported because the only thing that was stolen were drugs - this is by the shooters own admission. If the break in would have been reported it is just possible that the police would have taken an alternative route in serving their warrant.

The young man doing the shooting is very lucky that the police officers exercised caution and a level head and did not shoot back (I guess they know better than to shoot through a closed door, which by the way is what our young shooter did)

Officer Jarrod Shivers, left behind a wife, and 3 children, his youngest was 2 years old, he will never remember rough-housing with his dad, he will never get to go fishing with his dad, he will not ever have the pleasure of discussing cars, girls or how annoying sisters are with his dad...because his dad, died a hero's death. How dare you belittle that!?

This person who shot officer Shivers may not have a record, but every hardened criminal has a first time! At one time they all had a clean record.

Sometimes it is harder to get the real facts than to just jump on the band wagon.

**LEO's Wife

"People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid." ~Kierkegaard

 

[LEO'S WIFE]

oh and by the way, this did not happen in the dead of night...it was around 8pm