So it goes before a grand jury

[dewage83]

Could the police not search a DETACHED garage for a pot growing operation without entering the home to verify the informant’s story?

.......who knows?....

MASTEROFMALICE- can cops make no mistake? You seem to think that there is no defense to this man. I agree with suppsrting the police and am very pro-police but they are humans and CAN make mistakes.

If he got into a position to prepair to identify a target the cops would have immediatly shot him for aiming a weapon at an officer.

Marijuana possession and firearms possession is not a joke. I dont agree with ALL the laws but if it is a law then that is what it is. He was breaking the law, but without a previous arrest and a non crediable (probably disgruntled-druggie) informant there was no reason for all the commotion. Any plant takes at least a month to grow. Most alot longer than that, so those plants werent going anywhere if he did plan on profiting on them. So IMO theres no need for the "tactical raid team" to get a guy(without a criminal history) for some plants.(especially with out a recorded drug buy or suspicios activity) Like has been said... wait for him to move.

the .223 could be there for any reason. What I would like to know is if he owned any guns chambered in .223?

 

[MASTEROFMALICE]

The breacher could have been at the same place as Shiver as he was there to protect the breacher which he did.

Well there ya have it! You're perfectly justified in firing rounds outside your door just in case there's a bad guy out there. And if you don't hit the guy you're shooting at and you kill someone else? That's O.K. too!

Once again, when it comes out why he was shooting, you're all going to feel stupid for backing this fool.

 

[ilbob]

Once again, when it comes out why he was shooting, you're all going to feel stupid for backing this fool.

And the reason he shot a cop was because he had a fraction of an ounce of pot in the house?

 

[mbt2001]

va is actually pretty shoot friendly but not friendly enough for this guy i fear.don't shoot what you can't see

Don't shoot at what you can't IDENTIFY. A huge battering ram on your door is a hostile sign. This whole "don't shoot at what you can't see" is nonsense. Identify the target!!!! Perps seek cover too! In the Military and in law enforcement, it isn't necissary to EYEBALL CLEARLY the tango before engaging. The tango can be engaged once he has been IDENTIFIED.

If someone was beating your door with a battering ram cassandrasdaddy I hope I am there to see first hand your steely resolve and iron control at a potentially dangerous and catastrophic moment. We are all human, I can see doing what this guy did, under slightly altered circumstances, it could have been any of us.

Once again, when it comes out why he was shooting, you're all going to feel stupid for backing this fool.

uhhhhh, that may be the case but the police had no call to do what they did here. I don't care if the guy is guilty of eating little children whole, they went into his house with little or know evidence that is documented. This isn't "National Security" if they want the public to BELIEVE THEM, then they need to cough up documents and be truthful. If they made a mistake on the weed, admit it.

Failue to admit problems doesn't absolve anyone. Finding "drugs" doesn't absolve the Police for conducting a shoddy raid.

 

[MASTEROFMALICE]

And the reason he shot a cop was because he had a fraction of an ounce of pot in the house?

No. Keep guessing.

 

[MASTEROFMALICE]

Don't shoot at what you can't IDENTIFY. A huge battering ram on your door is a hostile sign. This whole "don't shoot at what you can't see" is nonsense. Identify the target!!!! Perps seek cover too! In the Military and in law enforcement, it isn't necissary to EYEBALL CLEARLY the tango before engaging. The tango can be engaged once he has been IDENTIFIED.

Well if he IDENTIFIED his target then he knew is was a police officer. So by your logic the 1st Degree murder charge should have no problem sticking. You've done a great service to your country MBT.

At best, your door being broken down doemonstrates a burglary in progress, since you haven't been threatened yet. And we've all pretty well agreed around here that you can't kill to protect property, except in Texas.

As I stated in a previous post, if a firefighter starts hacking down your door to get to a fire and you shoot him, let me know how that works out for you when your defence is "Well, I thought it was a cop or a burglar."

 

[lance22]

I wish they'd do more research when taking information from 'informants'. We've had a raid or two here in MN recently where an informant gave completely fictitious information, which resulted in a midnight SWAT raids to innocent homes. In one case shots were fired though nobody was hit. Then, it's YOU who goes on trial, not them.

 

[jrfoxx]

And he didn't look out a window to see who had showed up? I have no energy to defend this guy

If someone was bashing' down my front door, I wouldn't peek out the window either, as there's no doubt whoever it is, is up to no good, and isn't there to just say hi.Those people knock.When my door starts to splinter, you are considered hostile and violent, and I will react appropriately.

That doesn't necessarily mean I'll shoot through the door, but maybe.guess it depends on if it seems like you're gonna bash through it any second, or if it looks like it may take a little bit longer, but I only have a second or two to decide, just like this guy did.He didn't have all day on the internet to think and debate about it, he had a second or 2, and the wrong decision, which you have 2 seconds to make can get you killed.tough call to make, isn't it?.

If it looks like the door is gonna hold for a little bit, I'll just pull the classic Navy flanking maneuver, and sneak out another door and get you from behind. (get it, Navy....from behind....c'mon, this is classic buggery humor folks, get with the program)

p.s.-5 years active duty Navy, so I can make that joke. Jarheads, Air Farce, and ground poundin' Army nuts need not apply.

 

[wideym]

You do not have to make a full ID of a target to know it is hostile. Someone breaking down your door or window while you are at home usually indicates they mean you no good.

I am sure this guy didn't want to kill a cop, who would? Even the most hardened criminals know cop killers get the death penalty and are procecuted with the full force of the state.

On the surface it looks like both parties are at fault. This will go to trial, but with a case like this a jury could go either way.

 

[Eric F]

And the reason he shot a cop was because he had a fraction of an ounce of pot in the house?

No it was because he did not identify his target.

We are all human, I can see doing what this guy did, under slightly altered circumstances, and it could have been any of us.

Humans make mistakes every day, but it does not make it right and it sure does not mean your going to get a pass when it comes to murder.

You do not have to make a full ID of a target to know it is hostile

Really didnt work for Fredrick or Shivers very well did it?

 

[MakAttak]

No. Keep guessing.

Well, I'm gonna bet that if he was not shooting at the actual breecher (as you claim) then he fired through the door to frighten off the intruders.

Although doing such a thing is wrong, I SERIOUSLY doubt this should be 1st Degree Murder.

Now, add to this that the police were executing a warrant based on faulty and flimsy evidence, I doubt I will stop supporting this young man.

It is still just chilling to see a search warrant and breaching tactics granted simply because some slimy druggie said he saw you had drugs? That should be more unconsciable than firing a couple warning shots through the door.

 

[Sans Authoritas]

They were going after weed, a chemical less dangerous than alcohol. This lad could have had thousands of gallons of hard alcohol in his basement, enough to besot an entire city block, and he would've been left alone.

Yet they went after him because of a far less dangerous chemical. That's reason enough for me not to support the police in this case. They had no good reason to be there. At all.

"But it's the law, and it's the law not necessarily because it's right, or prudent, just, or wise. But it's the law because it's the law." Aye. Legal positivism is, quite literally, insanity on a grand scale, fostered by unthinking individuals.

Legal positivism is a juvenile delusion: the idea that another grown adult saying "you should do it because I said so," is an actual reason to obey him.

-Sans Authoritas

 

[Eric F]

They were going after weed, a chemical less dangerous than alcohol

There are lost of substances that are less dangerous than alcohol. But Alcohol is not illegal. Weed is. If he had not had any I would be on his side. If he had not had any the cops would have not been there to start with.

 

[MASTEROFMALICE]

Although doing such a thing is wrong, I SERIOUSLY doubt this should be 1st Degree Murder.

I agree. I said on day one when this happened that it's manslaughter. My prediction stands that that is what he'll be convicted of.

 

[MASTEROFMALICE]

Legal positivism is a juvenile delusion: the idea that another grown adult saying "you should do it because I said so," is an actual reason to obey him.

Like jaywalking? How about speeding, drink and driving, shooting into an occupied dwelling?

So if you shoot into someone's house (which is illegal) that should be O.K. even if no one is hurt? Let's even say the bullet passes through two open windows so there's no damage.

By your logic you should be perfectly allowed to do that. Good call, Sans. I like your thinking.

The fact that someone could very likely get hurt is irrelevant. The law says not to so we should all go out and do it just to show 'em how stupid the legislature really is.

I'm with ya, Sans! Just give me a time and a place and I'll bring my rifle.

Somewhere I'm sure the Constitution says something like, "Congress shall pass no laws abridging the right of the people to act like complete idiots and jeopardize the lives of everyone else around them."

 

[roo_ster]

Once again, when it comes out why he was shooting, you're all going to feel stupid for backing this fool.

Do, please enlighten those not in the know, so the crow can be passed out in a prompt manner.

Otherwise I might think you are as prone to pulling justification out of your fourth point of contact as those theorizing/justifying about the shooter's actions & state of mind.

 

[proud2deviate]

Like jaywalking? How about speeding, drink and driving, shooting into an occupied dwelling?

Nope. Driving drunk and shooting into a dwelling have a very real and even likely potential to cause harm. About the worst thing to be said about a joint (other than it's *gasp!* illegal,) is that it's a small fire hazard until it goes out.

 

[Eric F]

About the worst thing to be said about a joint (other than it's *gasp!* illegal,) is that it's a small fire hazard until it goes out.

There is a reason it is illegal......can you honestly say you can smoke weed and drive a car or handel a fire arm with out hazard? Not likely. And please do not drag alcohol in to it they are 2 way diffrent things.

 

[dewage83]

There is a reason it is illegal......can you honestly say you can smoke weed and drive a car or handel a fire arm with out hazard? Not likely. And please do not drag alcohol in to it they are 2 way diffrent things.
__________________

....BECAUSE PROHIBITION ENDED!!! YAY WHY ELSE ARE THEY DIFFERENT? I'm sorry but thats the kettle calling the pot black. Responsible use of any mind altering substance states that you dont operate heavy machinery, DRIVE, or handle firearms. weither pot booze or any other legal way to alter consienceness.

 

[rickoshea]

Who here really thinks that it was just coincidence that the guy had pot and a gun at the same address that a warrant for drugs was issued???

I find it interesting that so many people have issues with the cops for not giving the individual more time between yelling "warrant" and busting the door open, especially since so many here would rather be "judged by 12 than carried by 6" or "keep it chambered and not tip off my position to the BG by chambering a round".

How many here, if you were cops on a raid, would yell "Police.... let us know when you're ready!", and stand at the door waiting for a response? How many here would give an opponent that edge in a confrontation? Very few, based on many posts I've read on this forum. So why should a cop? They yell "POLICE... WARRANT... " to announce themselves... not to give the bg time to get ready.

The guys executing the warrant don't issue it, they go off of what they are told. They go in assuming that they have sufficient grounds to be there, and that the person(s) that they are after doesn't want to be caught, and that they may be armed and dangerous. That may also explain why they go at 2 a.m.--SURPRISE!!!

B4 anyone gets too critical of the guys serving the warrant, look at it from their perspective.

 

[MASTEROFMALICE]

"Police.... let us know when you're ready!"

Now that may be among the funniest lines I've read so far.

"Police, we know you've been breaking the law, now would be a good opportunity to jump out the back window to escape or to arm yourself and start shooting!"

 

[ilbob]

Police.... let us know when you're ready!

Thats actually a very good idea.

Not that there is any chance of getting any support for it.

 

[MASTEROFMALICE]

I'll assume you're joking.

Either that or you're a communist.

Maybe you're a joking communist.

 

[ilbob]

For a non-violent offender. Thats the way they used to do things. Show up and tell them it is time to go bye-bye. Seemed to work pretty good. No need for tanks and other neat toys.

 

[rickoshea]

"....For a non-violent offender. Thats the way they used to do things. Show up and tell them it is time to go bye-bye. Seemed to work pretty good. No need for tanks and other neat toys."

Um, how does one know who is non-violent and who isn't? Usually after they commit a violent act, yes? Back to the home invasion thing... If someone is in your house do you ask them if they are armed, just wait and see, or assume that they are, and act accordingly?

This guy was non-violent and a cop got shot. The guy had illegal drugs and a gun... probably not a pacifist.

All violent offenders were non-violent to begin with...