Man shoots at drug-raid cops, judge rules raid illegal
- Thread starter Ian
- Start date
- Status
carpettbaggerr
Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2003
- Messages
- 1,676
No argument here.
See the first quote. 5 seconds isn't much time to determine why armed men are invading your home.
No. But if they break the door down and force their way in, lethal force is justifiable almost anywhere in the US.
Armed men breaking down his door and forcing their way inside is a fairly good clue.
I don't see any way 5 seconds could be reasonable. There's no way for anyone to respond to a knock at the door in that length of time, even if they were in the front room. These cops were using a regular warrant as a no-knock. And the Judge called them on it.
Ian, without having the alleged court ruling to look at to be sure, I would guess that the ruling was specific to the circumstances of that case, and did not establish a "bright line" rule of 20 seconds. Meaning while it may set a precedent that other judges may use as a guide, a different case with different circumstances may get a much different ruling. Unfortunately many people look at very narrow, specific court rulings and generalize them. While they may provide some guidance one must always remember that unless they establish a "bright line" rule, they are usually specific to the circumstances of the case in question. Just because a court says 20 seconds was reasonable in one case, does not mean it is reasonable in every case.
Also, as I said without more information it is difficult for any of us to form a legit opinion on whether 5 seconds was reasonable. We don't know what facts the judge used to form his opinion.
Also, as I said without more information it is difficult for any of us to form a legit opinion on whether 5 seconds was reasonable. We don't know what facts the judge used to form his opinion.
FedDC,
If they had just banged on his door and given him a chance to identify themselves they wouldn't have got shot at. They broke in through the door.
I'd have to say that that depends on state law, but I don't think in most states you're required to identify who is breaking into your house. You have to identify a serious threat to yourself or others. Having you're door broken down seems to meet that requirement.
It's up to the police to properly identify themselves. They're the ones breaking down the door. The Judge ruled that they didn't identify themselves properly.
In Ohio it's defense of life or serious injury. It doesn't matter if they have a gun or not, if they can break down your door, they are obviously capable of doing serious injury to you. If you wait until a gun is pointed at you, it's to late. You're reacting, and by the time you do so you may very well be shot and dying.
Interior walls in a home or furniture don't really qualify as hard cover.
They violently entered his home in the early morning hours when people are normally asleep. Peaceful burglers make sure the owners aren't home. As far as what he could reasonably perceive they already showed their intentions weren't friendly.
You go to creative lengths to argue that the police are justified in every shooting I've seen you post about. When it's a civilian, you take exactly the other approach. You're the one applying the double standard.
I've applied the same standard in both types of situations. Did the shooter have a reasonable exptation that their life was in danger or they were in danger of being seriously injured.
You're arguing with the same reasoning you disagreed with when it was applied to a police officer. He also didn't shoot at a person standing outside his house. He fired on them as they were breaking down his door and entering his house.
This isn't TV. A couple sheets of wallboard, or an easy chair don't stop bullets. Verbalizing just makes it easier to be targeted.
Gaining concealment might have been a good idea, but 5 seconds isn't a lot of time to grab your gun and formulate a plan, especially when you've just been woken up. He made a reasonable decision based on his circumstances.
He didn't dictate the situation, the police did. The police had time to prepare and plan how to serve the warrent properly and safely.
All the homeowner could do was react, and his actions were not unreasonable given the situation he was placed in by the actions of others.
The Judge agreed with this. He ruled that the officers didn't identify themselves to to the homeowner well enough, so he wasn't knowingly attacking officers of the law.
If you want to discuss who should be held to a higher standard in a confrontation, it should be the people instigating the situation. The person who is reacting has the disadvantage.
It's a two way street when the situation is the same. In both of these situations the police were the ones invading a person's home. They take on the responsibility for making sure the homeowner knows they are the police.
If they had just banged on his door and given him a chance to identify themselves they wouldn't have got shot at. They broke in through the door.
I'd have to say that that depends on state law, but I don't think in most states you're required to identify who is breaking into your house. You have to identify a serious threat to yourself or others. Having you're door broken down seems to meet that requirement.
It's up to the police to properly identify themselves. They're the ones breaking down the door. The Judge ruled that they didn't identify themselves properly.
In Ohio it's defense of life or serious injury. It doesn't matter if they have a gun or not, if they can break down your door, they are obviously capable of doing serious injury to you. If you wait until a gun is pointed at you, it's to late. You're reacting, and by the time you do so you may very well be shot and dying.
Interior walls in a home or furniture don't really qualify as hard cover.
They violently entered his home in the early morning hours when people are normally asleep. Peaceful burglers make sure the owners aren't home. As far as what he could reasonably perceive they already showed their intentions weren't friendly.
You go to creative lengths to argue that the police are justified in every shooting I've seen you post about. When it's a civilian, you take exactly the other approach. You're the one applying the double standard.
I've applied the same standard in both types of situations. Did the shooter have a reasonable exptation that their life was in danger or they were in danger of being seriously injured.
You're arguing with the same reasoning you disagreed with when it was applied to a police officer. He also didn't shoot at a person standing outside his house. He fired on them as they were breaking down his door and entering his house.
This isn't TV. A couple sheets of wallboard, or an easy chair don't stop bullets. Verbalizing just makes it easier to be targeted.
Gaining concealment might have been a good idea, but 5 seconds isn't a lot of time to grab your gun and formulate a plan, especially when you've just been woken up. He made a reasonable decision based on his circumstances.
He didn't dictate the situation, the police did. The police had time to prepare and plan how to serve the warrent properly and safely.
All the homeowner could do was react, and his actions were not unreasonable given the situation he was placed in by the actions of others.
The Judge agreed with this. He ruled that the officers didn't identify themselves to to the homeowner well enough, so he wasn't knowingly attacking officers of the law.
If you want to discuss who should be held to a higher standard in a confrontation, it should be the people instigating the situation. The person who is reacting has the disadvantage.
It's a two way street when the situation is the same. In both of these situations the police were the ones invading a person's home. They take on the responsibility for making sure the homeowner knows they are the police.
CannibalCrowley
Member
FedDC
The victim could have done a lot of things, but he shouldn't have been forced to make a decision in the first place.
That depends on state law. I'm unsure about Arizona, but here in Michigan lethal force is justified even if the person is just attempting to gain entry into your home. If a burglar was trying to pry open my window I'd be well within my rights to fire. If my door wasn't steel I'd shoot through it if someone was trying to kick it in.
The victim could have done a lot of things, but he shouldn't have been forced to make a decision in the first place.
El Tejon
Member
It depends.
5 seconds could be too short or 50 seconds. Have seen all kinds of executions. Don't know what was going down here.
Too much not reported to draw any conclusions. I can tell you this (finally Kirk has some input) case will be appealed all way up food chain. Department has huuuuge exposure unless this guy goes down. Check on this in 6 to 8 months.
5 seconds could be too short or 50 seconds. Have seen all kinds of executions. Don't know what was going down here. Too much not reported to draw any conclusions. I can tell you this (finally Kirk has some input) case will be appealed all way up food chain. Department has huuuuge exposure unless this guy goes down. Check on this in 6 to 8 months.
I don't see any practical difference between busting down the door without warning and busting down the door 5 seconds after knocking. And I still have a big problem with busting down a door over an ounce of marijuana sold to an undercover cop by a teenager. I think the basis for having the PANT team serve the warrant was flawed, I think the execution of the warrant was flawed, and it placed not only the homeowner's life at risk, but also the PANT team members lives at risk, unnecessarily. This warrant could have been served by two patrol cops or a couple of detectives. I don't think Howell would have shot had his door not been busted down. I think the DA and the PANT team exercised VERY POOR judgement because they thought this would be an easy mark upon which to exert their authority. DMF and FedDC, you can keep putting lipstick on this pig, but it still oinks, IMO.
Riley, I don't know how you can accuse me of putting lipstick on a pig. I haven't defended either position. I have said all along we don't have enough info to draw any real conclusions. We weren't given any info regarding why the decision was made
You say two patrol cops could have served the warrant. You say a "raid" wasn't necessary, etc, etc, but there are not enough facts given to know that if that is true. I haven't drawn any conclusions, and I don't think it's fair for you to either.
In fact other than giving brief explanations of the reasonable time standard, the difference in no-knock v. knock and announce warrants, and the real reason for obtaining a warrant, the substance of my posts is that we don't have enough info to draw conclusions. I don't know how you get me defending the cops or villifying Howell out of ANY of my statements (incl my sarcastic quip about the word civilian ).
Again, I would like to know how they determined it was seconds, and if it was, did the officers give any reason for going in that time. Beyond that it would be interesting to see what was in the affidavit, which might indicate why they chose to execute the warrant in that manner. I could go on because it's unlikely any of can get our hands on that info very easily. My point however, is that without that info we shouldn't be taking sides one way or another.
You say two patrol cops could have served the warrant. You say a "raid" wasn't necessary, etc, etc, but there are not enough facts given to know that if that is true. I haven't drawn any conclusions, and I don't think it's fair for you to either.
In fact other than giving brief explanations of the reasonable time standard, the difference in no-knock v. knock and announce warrants, and the real reason for obtaining a warrant, the substance of my posts is that we don't have enough info to draw conclusions. I don't know how you get me defending the cops or villifying Howell out of ANY of my statements (incl my sarcastic quip about the word civilian
).Again, I would like to know how they determined it was seconds, and if it was, did the officers give any reason for going in that time. Beyond that it would be interesting to see what was in the affidavit, which might indicate why they chose to execute the warrant in that manner. I could go on because it's unlikely any of can get our hands on that info very easily. My point however, is that without that info we shouldn't be taking sides one way or another.
I have two things I would like to comment on.
1. It is not uncommon for criminals to identify themselves as police officers. I remember in the early 1980s in central Califonia (SLO county) there was a group of crimials that were robbing pot farmers. They would come in screaming that they were the police and were wearing clothing that looked like the police. They had robbed dozens of times and because of who they were robbing it only came to light when one of them shot one of his partners in the head and killed him while shooting at the indended victim. So how is a non-LEO going to quickly determine that the person(s) breaking down their door and yelling "police" are really the police? I don't have an answer to this question but I do believe that quick entry tactics by the police make this a more difficult situation for everyone including the police and the person being served as we can see by the content of this thread.
2. How much time is reasonable for the police to wait before breaking down a door? I think it is correct to say it depends. So for example if some inside yells "Over my dead body" as soon as the police announce then they should go in ASAP. But if instead someone yells back "I'm on my way, I need a second to get the key" and the indications are that that is what is happening then they should wait for the door to be opened even if it takes longer than 20 seconds. If there is no response at all then it seems that 20 seconds is about right. This is long enough for someone to respond in a meaningful way.
1. It is not uncommon for criminals to identify themselves as police officers. I remember in the early 1980s in central Califonia (SLO county) there was a group of crimials that were robbing pot farmers. They would come in screaming that they were the police and were wearing clothing that looked like the police. They had robbed dozens of times and because of who they were robbing it only came to light when one of them shot one of his partners in the head and killed him while shooting at the indended victim. So how is a non-LEO going to quickly determine that the person(s) breaking down their door and yelling "police" are really the police? I don't have an answer to this question but I do believe that quick entry tactics by the police make this a more difficult situation for everyone including the police and the person being served as we can see by the content of this thread.
2. How much time is reasonable for the police to wait before breaking down a door? I think it is correct to say it depends. So for example if some inside yells "Over my dead body" as soon as the police announce then they should go in ASAP. But if instead someone yells back "I'm on my way, I need a second to get the key" and the indications are that that is what is happening then they should wait for the door to be opened even if it takes longer than 20 seconds. If there is no response at all then it seems that 20 seconds is about right. This is long enough for someone to respond in a meaningful way.
Yowza
Member
Just for clarification, can I get a show of hands of people in this thread who feel that the charges against this guy are justified?
Rick
Rick
FedDC-
ZEIG HEIL! Maybe you should look into FEDSS as your username...
If you come kicking my door in and I am a law abiding citizen shot will be exchanged. A reasonable man, which you are not, doesn't expect cops kicking in their door; home invasion is on their mind. Technically that's EXACTLY what this was. The PANT officer got very bad info should have known it are proceeded anyway. If anyone died he should have been in jail. What's next, no-knock meter enforcement? Maybe they can call themselves SHIRTS instead of pants....BROWN SHIRTS that is.........
ZEIG HEIL! Maybe you should look into FEDSS as your username...
If you come kicking my door in and I am a law abiding citizen shot will be exchanged. A reasonable man, which you are not, doesn't expect cops kicking in their door; home invasion is on their mind. Technically that's EXACTLY what this was. The PANT officer got very bad info should have known it are proceeded anyway. If anyone died he should have been in jail. What's next, no-knock meter enforcement? Maybe they can call themselves SHIRTS instead of pants....BROWN SHIRTS that is.........
JohnBT
Member
A pot bust?
And they expect the kid to wake up and answer the door in 5 seconds?
Oh, they expected his folks to wake up and answer the door. Well, then they should have given them time.
I know I'd hear a door kicked in, but I have trouble hearing the spoken word when I'm face to face with people, so I'd have to assume the kicker was up to no good.
John...giving the NRA salute => hand cupped behind the ear
And they expect the kid to wake up and answer the door in 5 seconds?
Oh, they expected his folks to wake up and answer the door. Well, then they should have given them time.
I know I'd hear a door kicked in, but I have trouble hearing the spoken word when I'm face to face with people, so I'd have to assume the kicker was up to no good.
John...giving the NRA salute => hand cupped behind the ear
WilderBill
Member
If someone starts kicking in my door when I'm alsleep, they should understand that I
1. don't take kindly to property damage at 0 dark:30 or any other time
2. don't bother with a handgun when I feel threatened
3. don't have a clue who you really are, no matter what you shout (not that I would understand within 5 seconds of being woken up).
4. don't much care who you work for, once I have understood that you are an immedeate threat to me and my family, then you are identified - as an immediate, first priority target.
5. I will stop shooting when all threats are neutralized or I expend the 210 rounds I'll have on me when I start, whichever comes first.
6. if you want a peaceful, rational disscussion at that hour, then knok politely and wait 30 minuttes while I wake up and have at least two cups of coffee.
As I see it, this guy's mistake was not emptying an automatic rifle through the door at the first kick.
I don't see anything that would have prevented the PD from arresting his son on sight when he came out to go to school, work or whatever.
I'm not sure this was a good use of dept. resources to begin with. Normally a drug dealer isn't going to bother with a few grams in the first place. It sounds more like they talked him into selling one joint out of his personnal stash. Again, if they were going to that much trouble to get a drug bust, they could've busted him then and there.
LEOs, please keep in mind that a home invasion, wheather from burglers, drug dealers, someone pretending to be PD or real PD is just as scary and threatening from the inside of that door being kicked in.
There is no time to decide, only time to act and act now, to try to save you and yours.
If you think you have a quantity of drugs in the house, turn off the water, knock and wait. Sure they can get off one flush, but if there is any large quantity, that won't make much difference, will it?
1. don't take kindly to property damage at 0 dark:30 or any other time
2. don't bother with a handgun when I feel threatened
3. don't have a clue who you really are, no matter what you shout (not that I would understand within 5 seconds of being woken up).
4. don't much care who you work for, once I have understood that you are an immedeate threat to me and my family, then you are identified - as an immediate, first priority target.
5. I will stop shooting when all threats are neutralized or I expend the 210 rounds I'll have on me when I start, whichever comes first.
6. if you want a peaceful, rational disscussion at that hour, then knok politely and wait 30 minuttes while I wake up and have at least two cups of coffee.
As I see it, this guy's mistake was not emptying an automatic rifle through the door at the first kick.
I don't see anything that would have prevented the PD from arresting his son on sight when he came out to go to school, work or whatever.
I'm not sure this was a good use of dept. resources to begin with. Normally a drug dealer isn't going to bother with a few grams in the first place. It sounds more like they talked him into selling one joint out of his personnal stash. Again, if they were going to that much trouble to get a drug bust, they could've busted him then and there.
LEOs, please keep in mind that a home invasion, wheather from burglers, drug dealers, someone pretending to be PD or real PD is just as scary and threatening from the inside of that door being kicked in.
There is no time to decide, only time to act and act now, to try to save you and yours.
If you think you have a quantity of drugs in the house, turn off the water, knock and wait. Sure they can get off one flush, but if there is any large quantity, that won't make much difference, will it?
POT FARMERS!?!?! Dude, if that's your best example to make your case you're not convincing me. They definitely can't make the "I wasn't doing anything wrong, and had no reason to expect the cops to break down my door," argument. Oh man that's funny stuff.
Please get back to me with a better example.
Sindawe
Member
Wilderbill said:
No, THAT would have been an unreasonable response, since he would have had no idea who was kicking the door. Could be kids, could be someone with hands full knocking with available appendages
No, THAT would have been an unreasonable response, since he would have had no idea who was kicking the door. Could be kids, could be someone with hands full knocking with available appendages
Let me ask how do you tell the difference between someone shuffling around their house looking for a robe, and someone shuffling around going for their shotgun? I mean you're on the other side of a locked door, I'm wondering where you got your X-ray vision. If you think I'm taking the line "I'm on my way" at face value, you're delusional. People lie to delay, to prepare an ambush, destroy evidence, etc.
Hell I gave an example of peeking through a gap in the curtains and catching a glimpse of someone loading a shotgun, but you can't count on that kind of luck.
Sindawe
Member
Ex-Doc
Dude, chill. Attack the argument, not the person making the argument.
Dude, chill. Attack the argument, not the person making the argument.
ojibweindian
Member
Walks like a duck, sounds like a duck....
Obi-
Having dealt with actual white supremacists and neo Nazis, I can safely say that you sir are so far off base that your theory of association between American LEOs and Nazism is just plain sick. Swing by the Holocaust museum in DC or one of the actual concentration camps in Europe and you will see how ridiculous your accusation is. All that you are proving is that you know nothing about Nazism or the history thereof. If you wish to discuss the topic, feel free...but if you just want to be insulting try the DU. I'm sure you could find a lot to agree on.
Having dealt with actual white supremacists and neo Nazis, I can safely say that you sir are so far off base that your theory of association between American LEOs and Nazism is just plain sick. Swing by the Holocaust museum in DC or one of the actual concentration camps in Europe and you will see how ridiculous your accusation is. All that you are proving is that you know nothing about Nazism or the history thereof. If you wish to discuss the topic, feel free...but if you just want to be insulting try the DU. I'm sure you could find a lot to agree on.
alan
Member
I'm neither expert in the law nor in police proceedure, however this entire business has a ring to it, that ring being Fruit of The Poison Tree.
An Example of what happens when you wait to go in:
Pay Attention to this part-
"The Broward Sheriff's Office says Wilk was at home when the search warrant was served and refused to allow deputies inside his house."
Broward Deputy Dies After Being Shot In Altercation
Shooting Happens When Deputies Serve Search Warrant
POSTED: 12:31 pm EDT August 19, 2004
UPDATED: 1:06 pm EDT August 19, 2004
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The Broward County Sheriff's Office says one deputy has died after being shot Thursday by a high-powered weapon that penetrated his bulletproof vest.
Several members of the Law Enforcement Against Child Harm task force were at a home located at 1950 NE 57th Street in Fort Lauderdale around 8:05 a.m. Thursday to serve a search warrant involving child pornography.
Slideshow: Images From Crime Scene
The home belongs to 42-year-old Kenneth Wilk, who deputies say has had previous run-ins with police involving child pornography.
The Broward Sheriff's Office says Wilk was at home when the search warrant was served and refused to allow deputies inside his house.
When deputies forced their way in, Wilk apparently fired several shots with a high-caliber weapon. Sheriff Ken Jenne says Sgt. Angelo Cedeno, 36, was shot in the hand and shoulder and is undergoing surgery at North Broward Medical Center.
Jenne said Detective Todd Fatta, 33, was shot in the chest and died at the hospital. Authorities are not saying what kind of weapon was used in the shooting, but did say it was powerful enough to penetrate the deputy's bulletproof vest.
"Mr. Wilk had several weapons, several high-caliber weapons around the house," Jenne said.
Task force members have been to the home twice before, Jenne said. Last year, a child porn warrant was issued at the home in the residential neighborhood, at which point Wilk threatened officers and was arrested. Last month, another warrant was served and Wilk's roommate, registered sex offender Kelly Ray Jones, was arrested on charges of using the Internet to send illicit images of children to an undercover detective. He remains jailed.
"Mr. Wilk was bragging we had not found all of the child pornography" at that time, Jenne said, noting that they returned Thursday to find the additional material.
Wilk is now in custody and charges are pending.
Before Thursday, the last deputy killed in Broward County was 25-year-old Philip Billings, who was shot in April 2003 while working security at a Cadillac dealership by two men trying to steal high-price rims.
Billings was wearing his uniform and a bulletproof vest while working the off-duty detail arranged through the sheriff's office. The two suspects were later found dead in an apparent murder-suicide
Pay Attention to this part-
"The Broward Sheriff's Office says Wilk was at home when the search warrant was served and refused to allow deputies inside his house."
Broward Deputy Dies After Being Shot In Altercation
Shooting Happens When Deputies Serve Search Warrant
POSTED: 12:31 pm EDT August 19, 2004
UPDATED: 1:06 pm EDT August 19, 2004
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- The Broward County Sheriff's Office says one deputy has died after being shot Thursday by a high-powered weapon that penetrated his bulletproof vest.
Several members of the Law Enforcement Against Child Harm task force were at a home located at 1950 NE 57th Street in Fort Lauderdale around 8:05 a.m. Thursday to serve a search warrant involving child pornography.
Slideshow: Images From Crime Scene
The home belongs to 42-year-old Kenneth Wilk, who deputies say has had previous run-ins with police involving child pornography.
The Broward Sheriff's Office says Wilk was at home when the search warrant was served and refused to allow deputies inside his house.
When deputies forced their way in, Wilk apparently fired several shots with a high-caliber weapon. Sheriff Ken Jenne says Sgt. Angelo Cedeno, 36, was shot in the hand and shoulder and is undergoing surgery at North Broward Medical Center.
Jenne said Detective Todd Fatta, 33, was shot in the chest and died at the hospital. Authorities are not saying what kind of weapon was used in the shooting, but did say it was powerful enough to penetrate the deputy's bulletproof vest.
"Mr. Wilk had several weapons, several high-caliber weapons around the house," Jenne said.
Task force members have been to the home twice before, Jenne said. Last year, a child porn warrant was issued at the home in the residential neighborhood, at which point Wilk threatened officers and was arrested. Last month, another warrant was served and Wilk's roommate, registered sex offender Kelly Ray Jones, was arrested on charges of using the Internet to send illicit images of children to an undercover detective. He remains jailed.
"Mr. Wilk was bragging we had not found all of the child pornography" at that time, Jenne said, noting that they returned Thursday to find the additional material.
Wilk is now in custody and charges are pending.
Before Thursday, the last deputy killed in Broward County was 25-year-old Philip Billings, who was shot in April 2003 while working security at a Cadillac dealership by two men trying to steal high-price rims.
Billings was wearing his uniform and a bulletproof vest while working the off-duty detail arranged through the sheriff's office. The two suspects were later found dead in an apparent murder-suicide
TallPine
Member
But the resident of the house is supposed to be able to identify that it is police that are knocking on the other side of the closed door ....?
Oh, and if the police bust down a door at O'Dark-Thirty so the inhabitants will be incoherent, how do you blame them for being not being coherent enough to identify that it is indeed the police ...?
Anyway, I'm glad to see that the threatened closing of the Roundtable hasn't spoiled the fun around here.
- Status
