Man shoots at drug-raid cops, judge rules raid illegal

[Sindawe]

FedDC

Are you avocating 'no-knocks' for all warrant being served then? That is what it seems like with your posting of that article. Please elaborate.

About the Officer killed. Darn shame. Police in this case seem to have followed the letter and intent of the law w/ respect to warrants. The shooter knew who was at the door, and likely what for. Try him in court, if found guilty of murder, public hanging is in order..

About that hazards/risk of getting killed serving warrants. Risk of the job, which people are aware of when the sign up to be a LEO. Don't like the risks, get a different job.

 

[hvengel]

I was just pointing one case that I knew about that had been particularly violent. In the case that I was talking about those posing as the police killed someone while shooting at someone who was apparently running away. Granted their intended victims were criminals but they were not engaged in violence and in fact the news reports after this came out reported no instance that the intended victims did anything more than try to run away.

Other posters in this thread had instances that had happened in other locations and in every case these were crimes of violence and in most cases the intended victims were truly innocent

Look at the post by Stand_Watie

"(Thanks to Nemesis for the link) We had one of these where a woman was kidnapped/tortured/murdered here in Dallas a couple years back.

http://www.themonitor.com/SiteProce...;Section=Valley

August 16,2004
Travis Whitehead
The Monitor

MISSION ? A man has died after intruders dressed as cops stormed into his home and beat him.

The intruders, wearing masks and police-style clothing and carrying weapons, busted into three homes about 10 p.m. Saturday on North Taylor Road near and 4 Mile Line Road, said Investigator Gus Acosta, of the Hidalgo County Sheriff?s Department. Once inside, they threw the occupants facedown on the floor and ransacked the homes, Acosta said. ..."

This case was only a few days ago. There have been other cases locally but I picked the one I did because the people posing as police killed someone. So does it matter that the intended target of a group of criminals posing as the police are not themselves
totally clean? Or are only those that obey every law the only ones entitled to the protection of the law?

 

[Michigander]

Read Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes of Texas. There are specific laws speaking to a citizen's use of deadly force. There are specific laws which can justify a citizen's use of deadly force against police. … Neither I nor the laws ADVOCATE the use of deadly force. I am merely pointing out that insofar as the man's firing a shot at a time of a perceived home invasion, you are factually incorrect.

What? FedDC incorrect? Spin? Reply?

FedDC, normally you and I are more or less in agreement, but the statement quoted is incorrect. The reason for getting the warrant is because the 4th Amendment requires it, except in certain narrowly defined exceptions. The intent of the warrant requirement is to have the Magistrate review the circumstances to ensure that the search is justified. Groh v. Ramirez et al (2004) is proof that a Magistrate signing the warrant does not shift the liability to the judge. If the agents err, even with a warrant, they can be held liable.

What? FedDC incorrect again? Spin? Reply?

5 seconds to ID the targets? Did I miss something or are people either making up events or reading incorrectly? What I read:

"As the officers broke open the door at around 6:30 a.m. Howell fired a shot at them."

and

"...the forced entry of the residence within five seconds of the first knock ..."

The situation seems to play out like this:

6:35.00 Knock
6:35.05 Kick door in
6:35.0? Bang

I see nothing stating he had any time to ID the targets, just fired at unknown persons breaking down his door.

Sounds right to me from what I read.

Two white guys sittin in a car stand out.

Telling.

Funny, I recall that a recent threat roundly decried a Denver Officer for shooting a known felon with a shiny soda can in his hand. That officer believed his life was in danger and fired... He was criticized and called a JBT for failing to propperly ID his target. Where is the criticism for this shooter? There is no way the officers were not wearing ID, probably raid jackets and overt armor that says POLICE in reflective letters and verbalizing. So, why don't I hear the same criticism for failing to correctly ID a potential threat?

As others have pointed out, the aggressor should assume the responsiblity and the higher standard.

My point was that he failed to properly ID his target and or potential threat. What I am seeing here is that when a Police Officer makes the same mistake, he is a JBT and should be hung, but when a Non LEO does it while firing at the police it is "Understandable"... You can't have it both ways.

Again, whoever is the aggressor has the burden of justification.

You really go to lengths FedDC.

 

[spartacus2002]

This thread illustrates why Prohibition II (aka The War on Drugs) is a clearcut example of the cure being worse than the disease.

Police raiding a home at 0630, kicking in doors.

Militarization of law enforcement, in both equipment, tactics, and mentality.

Citizens being put on the defensive for merely defending their castle against unknown attackers.

Criminals pretending to be cops in order to raid homes.

News flash, LEOs: the damage that Prohibition II has done to the 4th Amendment is NOT WORTH the gains made. Assuming there actually are any gains made; after all, drugs are widely available, cheap to buy, and still make people rich selling them.

Prohibition II ain't accomplishing a damn thing but making drug dealers rich and making law-abiding citizens afraid of the cops. Legalize them and let us have our liberty back.

And if you're really afraid that people will use drugs, educate them as to why it's a bad idea. And if they wanna use them anyway, that's their business. If they get high and steal to support their habit, guess what, that's THEFT, and it's not the herb's fault. Saying DRUGS cause CRIME is the same as the anti-gunners' message that GUNS KILL.

I'm not relying on no-knock raids and fear of jail to keep my kids off drugs. Instead, I'll use a time-honored technique. It's called PARENTING.

 

[Desertdog]

Fed DC

Like it or not, you can't shoot at the Police.

It all depends on each circumstance.

A few years ago cops, using a search warrent, broke into a wrong house and as they cleared the top stairs they were met with gunfire. They returned fire and seriously wounded the homeowner.
I believe this was in the LA area but am not sure.

He was either found not guilty or was not charged, and when it was all over the home owner collected about $2,000,000.

So maybe you should rethink that "Like it or not, you can't shoot at the Police" If cops are in the wrong, maybe you can.

As for the 5 seconds between knocking and entry, I will suggest that the cops filmed their bust for whatever reason.
If they filmed it, all somebody had to do was use a stop watch and time it.

 

[Diggler]

About the Broward deputy

It's horrible he got killed like that.

If you know the perp is in there, and you can surround the house, why force the hand? Why not shut off the water and electricity and seal the perimeter if no one else is in there? He'll have to come out eventually.

Patience...

It would have worked at Waco too if they would have allowed it. You could even play some Nancy Sinatra to pass the time!

 

[DMF]

You all realize that the purpose of a SEARCH warrant is to search for and gather evidence? That means sitting around waiting will give the occupants time to destroy evidence. The Broward case was a child porn offender. Giving that guy time was going to ensure that he went and destroyed evidence. The number one place those SOBs keep their porn is on their computer. If you try to wait him out, the evidence will be gone.

 

[Michigander]

About the Broward deputy

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.

...

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.

With all the activity at the perp's house, it makes me wonder if the police hadn't noticed all the high-caliber firearms around the house? Even if not, he apparently threatened the police previously. Maybe the police could have convinced a judge to sign a no-knock in this case. Seems to me that there were some clear warning signs with this one.

 

[DMF]

Maybe the police could have convinced a judge to sign a no-knock in this case. Seems to me that there were some clear warning signs with this one.

Michingander you may have missed my earlier post on no-knock warrants on this thread:

"While myself, FedDC, and other LEOs on this board have tried to explain that no-knocks are uncommon, no one wants to believe that. Here is the difference, a no-knock requires that in addition to establishing PC the cops must also convince a judge that the danger is great enough to justify a no-knock. Much harder to do than people on this forum believe. There are some judges that will flat out refuse to sign off on a no-knock regardless of the circumstances."

I don't know if they tried, but it's possible that if they did the judge said no.

 

[Michigander]

DMF,

Yes, I read your post. And I believe you, hence the "maybe" and "could have" part of:

Maybe the police could have convinced a judge to sign a no-knock in this case. Seems to me that there were some clear warning signs with this one.

 

[ojibweindian]

Fed

You are a statist. I really don't know what else to say, other than I hope to God you never get a job in Alabama.

 

[Ex-Doc]

FedDC- Here's something for you.....

peace officer- noun-

1: a civil officer (as a police officer) whose duty it is to preserve the public peace

storm trooper- noun-

1 : a member of a private Nazi army notorious for aggressiveness, violence, and brutality
2 : one that resembles a Nazi storm trooper

and here's your employers mission statement...

A police state is a political condition where the government maintains strict control over society, particularly through suspension of civil rights and often with the use of a force of secret police. This implies that the control by the government contradicts the will of the people being controlled. Thus, a police state is inherently anti-democratic. It is similar to martial law.

The definitive literary treatment of a police state is George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, which describes a totalitarian régime that uses the excuse of constant war to permit police and security cameras to surveil the entire population.

Until the fall of the Berlin Wall, a classic modern police state was East Germany, or the German Democratic Republic (GDR). The country's secret police force, the Stasi (or Ministerium für Staatssicherheit) maintained an incredibly close watch over East German citizens, to the point where virtually every residential building, place of employment or place of leisure was home to at least one Stasi informant.

 

[Diggler]

I think the rhetoric is getting over the top.

 

[standingbear]

As others have pointed out, the aggressor should assume the responsiblity and the higher standard.

I couldnt agree more.the "no-knock" escalated the threat as it always will do. . a guarantee if you will.


what ever happened to good ol fashioned detective work,patience, and creativity in capturing a suspect? the mans gotta eat right?

 

[Deavis]

Once again, logic cannot prevail… If it does, change course and continue to argue!

Fed...

So does that mean that I can shoot at people that yell and bang on my door?

In Texas, at night, yeah, it is called criminal mischief. However, armed men were breaking down his door. Totally different situation so stay on track.

The shooter had a responsibility to clearly ID his target to the best of his abilities

The man was defending his house against armed intruders who may or may not have been police officers. We cannot know exactly what he saw but the fact remains that he was not guilty of any crime and could therefore have reasonable suspicion that the intruders were not really police officers.

However, that doesn’t even matter because once he did ID his target, he immediately surrendered. Don’t be mad because he isn’t a razor sharp Federally trained bionic superman capable of always making the right decision no matter what. He was scared and nervous, but at least he didn’t blame his itchy trigger finger on the Glock’s light trigger pull….

could the homeowner tell that his life was in immediate danger?

Armed men with guns breaking into an innocent man’s house.

he had no excuse for not also listening to what was being said "Police" and seeing who it was prior to employing lethal force. If we did something like this, we would get hung out to dry

“Your honor, I was under severe stress. My hearing was impaired by the high amount of adrenaline coursing through my body. I lost my fine motor skills and accidentally pulled the trigger too hard. It was an accident, my expert witness says so, and so do the rest of my loyal <wink, wink> friends. I know he didn’t have a gun but I swear I was defending my life. As soon as I realized he wasn’t armed, I stopped shooting him.â€

“That’s okay officer, we understand, go on home. As for you Mrs. Howell, the DA has plenty of charges for you to face since your husband up and died on us!â€

DMF…

While myself, FedDC, and other LEOs on this board have tried to explain that no-knocks are uncommon, no one wants to believe that. Here is the difference, a no-knock requires that in addition to establishing PC the cops must also convince a judge that the danger is great enough to justify a no-knock. Much harder to do than people on this forum believe. There are some judges that will flat out refuse to sign off on a no-knock regardless of the circumstances.

FedDC has informed us average citizens many times that he can get a warrant by simply winking at the DA. Check back in the no-knock threads where innocent people were killed, he was explaining just how easy it was to get one if he wanted to.

The standard is Immediate Defense of Life, not property. Outside his home, they were not a threat.

Uh… how are armed men breaking down your door not an immediate threat to your life? They were coming through his door not standing outside it. Did I read the article wrong? In your reality, did it read differently? Did you even read it?

Let’s get real here, I will bet you everything I have that if you rolled out of bed at 6AM, saw armed men coming in, you would shoot regardless of what they said. If you say you wouldn’t you are either lying or are willing to trust your life to a stranger. Since the latter is obviously untrue based on your history of remarks, it must be the former. I’m not trying to get personal, just make a point. You say that police chased a supsect through your house? Were you intoxicated or just being lazy that night? Surely, accroding to your prowess, you could have already subdued, cuffed, and pressed charges by the time DC metro came through. You are never off-duty as a LEO, why didn't you nail him? How long were you waiting to ID him before he pulled a gun on you or your family?

This is a real situation that everyone here might face and remember that stupid phrase, “If you are innocent you have nothing to hide!†Well, if you are innocent then anyone breaking down your door at 6AM can’t be there to serve you a gourmet breakfast. You are telling me you would wait to ID a threat coming into your house but you are not willing to case a house for 5 minutes because you might die. Come on!

The hypocrisy of your arguments are unreal. You are trying to spin a situation around without taking in the totality of the circumstances. We expect that LEOs, who are trained to observe, can properly take in the situation and make a decision. You say they can't. You say they can. Which is it?

DMF…

[SARCASM] BTW, I would prefer you not make the cop and civilian differentiation. It reinforces an us vs. them mentality. I'm a civilian too. [/SARCASM]

You are my new hero. Everyone else says you are not a civilian when you are a LEO. Always on duty, they say! I welcome your sarcastic butt into our little club. If you are in Austin, you can come over. Provided you don’t break the front door down on the way in for dinner.

Fed..

When all else fails, throw out the "Nazi" line... discuss the topic, don't name call.

They are, why won’t you answer their questions? Why can’t you argue their logic with logic instead of trying to come up with excuses to protect yours? Here is an exaplme of you making an excuse to cover up the fact that your arguments in the Howell case have no merit.

"The Broward Sheriff's Office says Wilk was at home when the search warrant was served and refused to allow deputies inside his house."

As many people have said over and over and over and over and over. Confronting criminals is the job of a LEO. Don’t like it, quit. Since we are straying, let me point out a couple problems with you bringing in the article to prove a non-existent point

1) That man was a known child pornographer, Howell was not
2) Wilks had threatened police before, Howell had not
3) His roommate was a convicted felon, Howell’s wife was not (son, I don’t know)

What say you here?

I'll stay with my original argument from months ago. Police knock, say warrant, I say ok, show me, come on in. Police don't knock, come in with guns, I'm defending my life until I can ID them as real cops. Do I surennder and get gunned down? Do I trust them to respect my life? Tough to do, but since you don't trust me, I'm not trusting you.

Here is his defense against prosecution in Texas… They were attempting to arrest him illegally and displayed deadly force by coming in armed. Since the arrest was unlawful the citizen can legally respond with deadly force. Thus, he couldn’t be commiting a crime because he was within his rights to resist an unlawful arrest with deadly force. <looks to the judges>

 

[firearms_instructor]

Here's part of the problem...

While myself, FedDC, and other LEOs on this board have tried to explain that no-knocks are uncommon, no one wants to believe that.

DMF, I hope to God you're right, but it seems like they are becoming more and more common, and happening to the wrong people for the wrong reasons (hibiscus, anyone?). I cannot accept marijuana as a legitimate reason to break someone's door down. And way too many of these busts are being instigated by comfidential informants, with not much real police work being done to double-check the facts. Now I'm clear I wasn't there and don't know all the details, but from the ALLEGED facts as we know them this PANT raid was one foul and repugnant PANTload. I suspect the Law Enforcement Growth Industry feels the need to justify it's SWAT teams, but way too many innocent people are becoming victims of these horrendous botched raids.

Like it or not, you can't shoot at the Police.
Are you saying that the police are above the law?

If memory serves me, there was a Federal law which makes it a mandatory death penalty to kill a Federal employee. STOP THE PRESSES! FOUND IT! It's in 18 U.S.C. 115. However, I am completely unaware of any Federal law which makes it a mandatory death penalty to kill an ordinary citizen. So FedDC and his fellow Federal employees (e.g., Lon Horiuchi) are a protected species.

BTW guys, I've actually been to several police states, was born in one, know what happens in them, and am pissed as hell to see this country turning into one.

 

[Deavis]

Oh as long as we are going off topic to prove our points...

http://www.post-gazette.com/win/day4_1a.asp

If you want to know more about the lies involved in this incident, how the warrants were questionably obtained (at a shell station), how this incident cost my bestfriend's father his job in the U.S. Customs (27 years of service), and why it took 6 years of legal wrangling to exonerate him for not lying to cover up what these federal agents did, i.e. shooting an innocent man in the back and letting him almost die.

Yeah... the cost of doing business, right?

 

[DMF]

If memory serves me, there was a Federal law which makes it a mandatory death penalty to kill a Federal employee. STOP THE PRESSES! FOUND IT! It's in 18 U.S.C. 115.

That's a LIE, the penalty is death or life imprisonment. Which is similar to most state murder statutes with regard to possible punishments.

18USC115: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ts_search.pl?title=18&sec=115

References 18USC1111 when defining the punishment for federal murder: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ts_search.pl?title=18&sec=1111
Which states: "Whoever is guilty of murder in the first degree shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for life"

Please have the decency to TELL THE TRUTH when arguing your point. Your credibility is shot.

 

[Don Gwinn]

Sure is, and the name-calling is unacceptable.

I'm not sure how I managed it, but I posted this two hours after the post I THOUGHT was the last. I am referring to Diggler's comment about the rhetoric being over the top, not to anyone's allegations about anyone's credibility. I apologize for any problems I caused.