The dangers of defending your home.
- Thread starter F4GIB
- Start date
- Status
This is an incredibly difficult subject which I have raked my brain over for some time now.
The SCOTUS says in US vs Banks (2003) that only a 10-15 second wait between announcement and entrance to a home is sufficient. This hardly gives time for me to run to my window and see the squad cars outside. (assuming there are squad cars.
Also, it doesn't matter if the cops were wearing plain clothes or not. You can buy anything from just this website http://www.galls.com/category2.html?assort=general_catalog&cat=2642
Including badges, body armor etc. And no, if you order stuff that says 'POLICE' on it, they do not require much in the way of proof. I know because I worked for an ambulance company and was assigned to the SWAT team for a while and I ordered it myself with no problems.
The SCOTUS says in US vs Banks (2003) that only a 10-15 second wait between announcement and entrance to a home is sufficient. This hardly gives time for me to run to my window and see the squad cars outside. (assuming there are squad cars.
Also, it doesn't matter if the cops were wearing plain clothes or not. You can buy anything from just this website http://www.galls.com/category2.html?assort=general_catalog&cat=2642
Including badges, body armor etc. And no, if you order stuff that says 'POLICE' on it, they do not require much in the way of proof. I know because I worked for an ambulance company and was assigned to the SWAT team for a while and I ordered it myself with no problems.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
I missed something in the title. The dangers of defending your home? Given that it was an officer killed, would it not be the dangers of forced entry?
Not exactly. They said the officers’ 15-to-20-second wait before forcible entry satisfied the Fourth Amendment in this case. This was in response to the claim that the entry violated Banks' 4th Amendment rights. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-473.ZS.html
Not exactly. They said the officers’ 15-to-20-second wait before forcible entry satisfied the Fourth Amendment in this case. This was in response to the claim that the entry violated Banks' 4th Amendment rights. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-473.ZS.html
Your post implies that the Court said 10 to 15 seconds is sufficient for all knock and announce warrants, but that is not true at all. In fact they reaffirmed the concept that, "This Court has fleshed out the notion of reasonable execution on a case-by-case basis . . ."
Old Dog
Member
Well, the usual developments ... cop vs. citizen thread, paucity of factual information available, most posters automatically conclude the outcome is the fault of the cops and the citizen was only doing what he had to do ...
Perhaps THR should have an automatic 5-day waiting period subsequent to any LEO-involved shootings, prior to allowing threads on these incidents, in order to allow time for solid information to get out (from each side, and not just the initial media stories)?
Oh, wait -- no one here supports waiting periods nor allows the truth to interfere with their opinion when it conflicts with their anti-LE bias ...
Perhaps THR should have an automatic 5-day waiting period subsequent to any LEO-involved shootings, prior to allowing threads on these incidents, in order to allow time for solid information to get out (from each side, and not just the initial media stories)?
Oh, wait -- no one here supports waiting periods nor allows the truth to interfere with their opinion when it conflicts with their anti-LE bias ...
insidious_calm
Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2004
- Messages
- 337
An anecdote..
FWIW, we had a case here in Kansas where a bunch of narco cops served a warrant at o'dark thirty and one of them got killed. Drugs were found in the house, albeit the next day, and on a new warrant, as the first one proved unfulfilling.
At any rate the suspect was charged with murder and subsequently aquitted by the jury. In news interviews the jury said that they could not support a conviction when officers failed to knock and announce. The suspects name was Stephen Shively. Plenty of news on it for those interested in looking.
The moral here is that door kickers enter at their own risk. If you don't have the decency to knock you get no sympathy if your dumb self gets shot. 'No Knocks' serve no purpose that outweighs the risks they present to the people involved, both officer and occupant, and those to liberty as well. It should also be noted, that in the Shively case the narco raid leader stated in court, under oath, that his team always does no knock entries whether the judge authorized it or not. I'd bet that is more often the case then not.
Let me be clear that I wish no officer harm. I just don't shed any tears when they act like gestapo and get shot. They do however, have more control over these situations than anyone else, and thusly have more culpability when poop happens.
I.C.
FWIW, we had a case here in Kansas where a bunch of narco cops served a warrant at o'dark thirty and one of them got killed. Drugs were found in the house, albeit the next day, and on a new warrant, as the first one proved unfulfilling.
At any rate the suspect was charged with murder and subsequently aquitted by the jury. In news interviews the jury said that they could not support a conviction when officers failed to knock and announce. The suspects name was Stephen Shively. Plenty of news on it for those interested in looking.The moral here is that door kickers enter at their own risk. If you don't have the decency to knock you get no sympathy if your dumb self gets shot. 'No Knocks' serve no purpose that outweighs the risks they present to the people involved, both officer and occupant, and those to liberty as well. It should also be noted, that in the Shively case the narco raid leader stated in court, under oath, that his team always does no knock entries whether the judge authorized it or not. I'd bet that is more often the case then not.
Let me be clear that I wish no officer harm. I just don't shed any tears when they act like gestapo and get shot. They do however, have more control over these situations than anyone else, and thusly have more culpability when poop happens.
I.C.
RobTzu
Member
A concrete example of the lost liberty and lives due to the war on drugs. Prohibition redux.
ZeSpectre
Member
I never understood these sorts of "raids". If you think someone is doing something then wait and take them as they leave the place, serve the warrant, then go in when you are pretty sure the place is empty.
ctdonath
Member
There is a place for no-knock/dynamic-entry warrants, and the subject has been debated to no good end.
What strikes me is the "undercover cops" - to wit "plainclothes" - description. THAT I don't understand:
- when entering a home, looking like a duck will get you shot like a duck
- dynamic entry is only appropriate in situations when the subject is highly likely to shoot back ... so why go in wearing only the ballistic protection of a T-shirt?
I don't get it.
Crockett & Tubbs can pull it off, but they have the diety of the scriptwriter on their side. Reality dictates a dynamic entry be done with a fully-armored crew, both to ensure identification (a crew of identically-dressed heavily-armored guys with "POLICE" on their chests probably is), and protection (full kevlar is preferable to light cotton). Short of a "the hostage is gonna die NOW" scenario, I don't see any basis for "undercover dynamic entry" - do you?
highlander 5
Member
To degrees some,back in the late 70's my older cousin almost shot 2 drug officers that kicked in his door and AFAIK no warrant turned out they were at the wrong address. The topper when he sent the bill for a new door to the police they told him pound sand.
yeah, i can imagine at least four others...
suspect(s) are manufacturing items that can pose a threat to people outside the immediate vicinity of the address (dirty bombs, meth fumes, poisons etc...)
suspect(s) are known violent offenders and are probably armed and are willing to shoot at police
suspect(s) are/have claimed to be involved in a situation that threatens lives outside of the place being entered (for example the BG inside the house is part of a bank robbery team, and his job is to monitor police scanners for activity near the target)
suspect(s) are involved in imminent attacks against civilian or military targets... for example, they just set of a bomb at LAX and are threatening to remote detonate another...
other than those few rare cases, i dont see a reason... the 2nd reason i mentioned is probably going to get used the most when it comes to people with outstanding warrants, high impact drug cases, homicide suspects etc...
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
I don't see much in the commentary here which really relates to the event itself, or about any laws or legal process.
Enuf venting and speculation...
Enuf venting and speculation...
- Status