More NYPD No-Knocks

Status
Not open for further replies.

2dogs

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,865
Location
the city
Well, whatever you may think about the "militarization" of police and police methods- this may be where it leads.

Not good for citizens, not good for peace officers.
---------------------------------------------------------




http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0325/little.php

In the meantime, victims are becoming increasingly agitated. One raid victim, Orlando Russell, said he "used to be an upstanding citizen," but now "any cop walking in without an invitation better have a body bag."


More NYPD No-Knocks

by Rivka Gewirtz Little
June 18 - 24, 2003



A thundering boom in her Brooklyn apartment exploded into Jeanine Jean's sleep. Shrieking, she grabbed her crying six-year-old son and the phone, and leapt into the closet. Somehow smoke was filling her home. She frantically dialed 911. But that was futile, because it was the NYPD who had by then broken down her front door, and tossed a stun grenade into the apartment in a botched search for guns and a man nicknamed "Danger." They found neither.

It was 1998, long before Harlem resident Alberta Spruill, 57, suffered a fatal heart attack when police lobbed a stun grenade into her home this May 16. In Spruill's case, officers were seeking drugs and a man who lived elsewhere, who they later realized had already been arrested. Except for the cardiac arrest, the two incidents seem incredibly parallel. Yet they are identical to scores of similar stories emerging over the last two weeks from individuals in communities of color who have fallen prey to faulty and excessive police raids.

Two weeks ago, Manhattan Borough President C. Virginia Fields established a hot line beckoning victims of faulty no-knock raids. "While I have heard of these situations, the reality is people in decision-making roles—the mayor, the police commissioner—don't get this," she told the Voice. "They don't hear it, they don't get it, and they don't believe it." In fact, the mayor and police commissioner apologized for Spruill's death and claimed responsibility. Still, the barely advertised hot line received 110 responses in the first week. Resembling the backlash before the stop-and-frisk shake-ups of the '90s, these complaints indicate, at least anecdotally, that communities of color are experiencing harsh treatment from the police, this time behind their own doors.

It also appears that the NYPD, the city's five district attorney's offices, and criminal judges may not be doing enough to prevent these botched raids. Until Spruill's death, the NYPD had done nothing to stem the number of incidents, despite receiving a memo from the Citizen's Complaint Review Board (CCRB) in January noting the high number of raid complaints. Last March, the NAACP also approached NYPD commissioner Raymond W. Kelly about the raids.

Assistant district attorneys and judges are the check-and-balance system for the police. And it is questionable whether A.D.A.'s and judges—responsible for reviewing police evidence before approving warrants for these "no-knock" raids—are being sufficiently critical of each request. Civil liberties advocates are demanding to know if they are settling on the word of shifty confidential informants (CIs) without seeking enough corroborating evidence from presenting officers. Last week a judge refused to unseal the affidavit with evidence supporting the Spruill warrant, said David Bookstaver, a spokesman for the Office of Court Administration (OCA). That affidavit could show whether there was adequate evidence beyond the CI testimony. Race, many believe, is also suspected to be a factor in the warrant process. "You know they are not going to do this in Trump Plaza," said attorney Richard Montelione, who represents Jean in a case against the city.

Presenting numbers backed up by incomplete data, Kelly testified before a City Council hearing this month that about 13,000 warrants were issued between January 2001 and May 2003, the vast majority being no-knock. He estimated approximately 10 percent—or about 1,300—yielded no evidence or arrests. Councilmember Peter Vallone Jr., the chair of the public safety committee, who sees the need for some policy reform, said many of the 1,300 might be cases of removed evidence and that the numbers could be worse.

Looking to deflate claims that no-knock raids occur more often in communities of color, Kelly explained at the hearing that warrants are issued in neighborhoods in which crime statistics are the highest. Also at the meeting, Mary Bardy, a white woman from Queens, was invited to testify as to how she and her family were held to the floor with guns to their heads.

Just 24 hours after the City Council meeting, Fields held an independent hearing that told a more complex story. Dozens of black and Latino victims—nurses, secretaries, and former officers—packed her chambers airing tales, one more horrifying than the next. Most were unable to hold back tears as they described police ransacking their homes, handcuffing children and grandparents, putting guns to their heads, and being verbally (and often physically) abusive. In many cases, victims had received no follow-up from the NYPD, even to fix busted doors or other physical damage.

Some complainants reported that they had filed grievances with the CCRB and were told there was no police misconduct. Unless there is proven abuse, the CCRB disregards complaints about warrants that hold a correct address but are faulty because of bad evidence from a CI. A June 9 Newsday article alleged that many former CCRB members now say the committee recognized the problem with warrants months before they reported it to the commissioner. Many also noted the policy of turning away complaints about raids with the right address.

Fields is seeking more in the way of policy change than Kelly or Mayor Michael Bloomberg are offering. She praised the mayor for quickly taking responsibility for Spruill's death even before the chief medical examiner's office called it a homicide. She also said that Kelly's prompt reassignment of commanding officers in that precinct was a good start. But Fields fears other policy changes, including a database that will track all warrants, tougher oversight of warrants issued, and a stiffer evidence requirement, won't be closely monitored. And the changes don't address how police behave in raid situations. "What guarantees that even if new procedures are followed, there is going to be a sense of humanity and sensitivity in how you respond to innocent victims?" she asked. In an alarming percentage of stories, victims complained of police laughing at them while they were face down with guns to their heads—and some described nasty debasements, including one officer allegedly urinating in a pitcher of iced tea in a victim's refrigerator.

More specifically, Fields wants to see stricter requirements for confidential informants. And she said there may need to be a select group of judges—10 or 20—who are allowed to issue warrants and will be held specifically accountable. That would eliminate police from seeking "any judge they can get up off the bench or out of bed," she said. In the Jean case, it was a Queens judge who approved the Brooklyn raid. Finally, Fields sees a severe "lack of coordination" among police, D.A.'s offices, and the judges—apparent in the Spruill warrant, which was issued after the arrest had already been made.

Civil liberties advocates are looking for all three tiers of the criminal-justice system to truly observe the so-called Aguilar-Spinelli test. Most cities base their warrant procedure on the case law that requires police to prove the CI's truthfulness in asserting, for instance, that there is existing danger in an apartment. The affidavit in Jean's case includes only CI testimony, without other police evidence. Montelione's later deposition of an officer involved in the raid has not brought forth any more evidence, tying the case up in court for years. In a recently reported case of a botched raid in the Bronx, police burst into an apartment, apprehending a young mother and father who were bathing their infant. They later learned the CI had been referring to an apartment one floor up. "If police had talked to the managing agent in the building, they would have known the right apartment. Everybody in the building knew who they were," said Francis Alberts, a former Bronx A.D.A., who is now handling the case against the city on the Bronx case.

For the moment, it will be hard to spur politicians into action without real data proving exactly how many people have been victimized. Donna Lieberman, head of the New York Civil Liberties Union, has requested data from the OCA, including how many no-knock warrants are requested, granted, and denied. Court administration spokesman David Bookstaver said he has been "swamped" by the same request, but the office doesn't track the information—hence the importance of Kelly's proposed database. Still Norman Siegel, former head of the NYCLU, who is representing a raid case that will be filed in federal court, is requesting statistics for warrants dating back 10 years. Lieberman is also requesting that the CCRB release all no-knock complaints.

In the meantime, victims are becoming increasingly agitated. One raid victim, Orlando Russell, said he "used to be an upstanding citizen," but now "any cop walking in without an invitation better have a body bag."
 
While our air forces went so far as to drop dummy (not fuzed) bombs in Iraq to minimize collateral damage, it seems to be routine when issuing search warrants here to accept a certain number of casualties amongst innocents.

In the meantime, victims are becoming increasingly agitated. One raid victim, Orlando Russell, said he "used to be an upstanding citizen," but now "any cop walking in without an invitation better have a body bag."

In the absence of restraint by judges, prosecuting attorneys, and police management, Mr. Russell's solution may be inevitable.

Pilgrim
 
While the thought of an illegal no-knock tripping claymores or something like that is rather amusing, I think it will probably be the deadliest weapon of all that stops it... trial lawyers.
 
I think it will probably be the deadliest weapon of all that stops it... trial lawyers.

I doubt it. If you go to the Police Paramilitarism Thread , and read about Dinuba, CA, you might get the impression that city of Dinuba was bankrupted. However, if you go to Dinuba today, I'm sure you will find the police are still driving new patrol cars, and none of the city employees are out offering to work for food. Even if a government entity is self-insured, no judge is going to force the entity into insolvency. A deal will be struck where the entity pays out the judgment in installments over a period of time. BTW, the final settlement in the Dinuba case was $6 million. I have the article.

I think the only thing that will stop or rein in these "oops" raids will be if a prominent person is killed, or a armed homeowner strikes back with deadly efficiency and inflicts grievous casualties on the police. In the latter case, it will take an acquittal of the homeowner in court because the homeowner: 1) Is an honest and good man without a criminal record, 2) He had no reason to ever suspect he was the target of a criminal investigation, and 3) He was unable to identify the intruders as police because of their dark uniforms.

Pilgrim
 
I think the only thing that will stop or rein in these "oops" raids will be if a prominent person is killed, or a armed homeowner strikes back with deadly efficiency and inflicts grievous casualties on the police. In the latter case, it will take an acquittal of the homeowner in court because the homeowner: 1) Is an honest and good man without a criminal record, 2) He had no reason to ever suspect he was the target of a criminal investigation, and 3) He was unable to identify the intruders as police because of their dark uniforms.

pilgrim,

dead men tell no tales.

Should someone actually be able to strike out at any ill-advised police officers conducting a no-knock and cause harm to a member of the team, said individual would most certainly look like swiss cheese and end up being guilty of something far more sinister than protecting his daughter/mother, etc.

He would in fact become a criminal and I'm sure the press would have it all over the news, etc within minutes; digging into his background, his arsenal displayed, the poor officers family members grieving in front of the cameras, etc.

And the poor slob who was fast asleep and quickly responded with nightstand gunfire would be unable to have his day in court. For that matter all other family members or room-mates would more than likely face the wrath of the other team members who were, once again, just doing their jobs.

Nobody wants to see a team member go down, their adrenalin is up, their guns are ready and fully automatic, their faces are covered...

How in the world could anyone who might survive actually testify against those masked men when there's smoke, no lights other than the officer's "surefire" in their eyes, they're deafened, daddy's dead right in front of them, etc.

"Oops, just doing our job, following orders. He fired first, -or- it looked like a gun and I feared for my life".

The Scott case in California comes to mind. (Not that it was a no-knock)

Accidents do happen. The kings men are never (well, very rarely) wrong. How can one Prove that they were when one is dead?

Imponderable points.

Potential for a SNAFU is only what, 10%?

But I could be wrong.

Are you a gambling man?

Adios
 
The problem is not with the SWAT teams, relative to serving no-knock warrants. The rest of the system, the parts that gathers inteligence, investigates, decides, and permits SWAT deployment are the ones who seem to be the problem.

Remember, 99% plus of SWAT deployments result in nobody injured, good guy or bad guy. The same could not be said using a "traditional" police response.

As for planning on taking out a professional entry team in case they are given your address incorrectly... It is probably a better idea to rely on that number 99. Your odds are certainly better that way.
 
What concerns me is Kelly's statement that "the vast majority" of warrants are NO-KNOCK. Why is this?

Does the rest of the country execute NO-KNOCK warrants in a "vast majority" of cases? Is this a national trend?
 
YOU ALL FORGET

You are all forgetting the most important part: some judge SIGNED the warrant. Who elected him? I'll bet he gets RE-elected too. The entry team is doing the job on the information presented to them, they may not have filed the application, they just got the assignment. If they act in an inappropriate manner (above protecting themselves and their teammates) then file a civil rights complaint. Course, that doesn't make headlines.
 
Remember, 99% plus of SWAT deployments result in nobody injured, good guy or bad guy. The same could not be said using a "traditional" police response.

Really???

Could you cite your source for this statistical information??

I doubt that the old knock first warrants were any more lethal for the police than the new No _knocks. But I bet ya the new ones result in many more dead civilians, many of them innocent.
:barf:
 
Off the top of my head? No. Years of reading FBI bullitins, law enforcement stacks, criminology textbooks, etc are in the statement.

I'm open minded though. I'll happily concede a few points should someone be able to provide studies showing drastically lower numbers; something around 95.9% perhaps?

SWAT teams save lives.
 
It is kind of an unpleasant thought, but I'm pretty sure that I'm going to die if there is an accidental no-knock on my house in the middle of the night. Because if a bunch of guys dressed like ninjas bust down my front door when I'm in bed, I'm going to shoot them. Not because I have it out for cops (or want to put on a show of how macho I am on the 'net), but because I'd logically have no reason to know if it was a home invasion by gang-bangers or not.

After all, the strongest weed I've got in my cabinet is dill weed. The only rock I've got is AC/DC. The only smack I've got is from ex-girlfriends. Why would the SWAT guys come after ME?
 
Recently in Baltimore the city police conducted a dynamic entry raid on a guy's house were it was suspected he was doing some small time narcotics dealing.

The outcome.

The suspect, in defending his family and home, fired six .45 calibre shots at four police officers wounding all four and sending them to the hospital. He did not know the raiders were police. The home owner fired six shots, and got five hits, apparenlty without really aiming.

Because proper police procedures were not followed, the city attorney refused to prosecute the home owner, much to the anger of the police officialdom.

The stupidest thing about this incident is it could have been avoided. The home owner had a job at his parent's store and commuted to and from work, were it is presumed he could have been easily arrested without the SWAT heroics.

I find it very interesting that bail bondsmen and bounty hunters arrest many people everyday at their homes and you never hear of one of these arrests going bad. And, these folks do not require a search warrant to enter the premises.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top