Breath Taking No Knock Atrocity

[Dave2]

No knock warrants should only be used when police know for sure there is a fugitive in the home they are going in, in my opinion.

In view of a rich history of judges who will sign any warrant requested, including no-knock warrants, and an equally rich history of no-knock warrants being abused and overused, no-knock warrants should be made unlawful. Arguing that people cannot be taken into custody outside of their home without greater danger to officers and the public is bogus. It's done all the time. In fact, until the increased militarization of law enforcement and the use of military style tactics and weapons, it was the method of choice.

If anyone doubts that some judges will sign any warrant requests, just consider so-called "no refusal" holidays. While I don't have a problem with arresting and prosecuting drunk drivers, I have a very big problem with a judge sitting by a phone with a pin in his or her hand ready to issue a warrant for every request submitted. Every judge involved in such unconstitutional tactics should be disbarred and prosecuted for official oppression. No end result is worth destroying constitutional protections.

Chas.

Please run for some office for which I can vote.

[rbwhatever1]

Trying to justify the urgency and merit of a "no knock home invasion" to catch a bad guy that wasnt even home during the calamity is preposterous.

This entire operation was destined to fail from the moment the Judge signed the warrant because the "bad guy" was no longer the issue once the warrant was in hand. The issue at hand was executing the dramatic entry with all the cool toys and the main "purpose" of the warrant itself no longer existed.

[b322da]

In view of a rich history of judges who will sign any warrant requested, including no-knock warrants, and an equally rich history of no-knock warrants being abused and overused, no-knock warrants should be made unlawful. Arguing that people cannot be taken into custody outside of their home without greater danger to officers and the public is bogus. It's done all the time. In fact, until the increased militarization of law enforcement and the use of military style tactics and weapons, it was the method of choice.

If anyone doubts that some judges will sign any warrant requests, just consider so-called "no refusal" holidays. While I don't have a problem with arresting and prosecuting drunk drivers, I have a very big problem with a judge sitting by a phone with a pin in his or her hand ready to issue a warrant for every request submitted. Every judge involved in such unconstitutional tactics should be disbarred and prosecuted for official oppression. No end result is worth destroying constitutional protections.

Chas.

Jim

[EEllis]

he could have been guilty of mass murder, that doesn't justify the fact that they took all eyes off the house long enough for him to leave, and for EVERYONE in the house to go to sleep. if you read it, it sounds like it was hours later, like many hours, because no judge is going to want to sign a warrant at 3 AM! so let's say the drug buy went down at 3 PM and the warrant was signed by 5, because they are just speedy that way, that gave them 10 hours!!! You're trying to make it sound like it all happened in 15 minutes, but I'm just not buying it. They still didn't take a look at the cars in front of the house to see who was there? yeh, I"m feeling better everyday about my best friend living in that area.

I'm not "trying" to make it sound like anything. I am just repeating what I heard. No one who knows anything about getting a warrant thinks it takes 15 min to get one. This probably happened around 2 ish so it would of likely been sometime in the late afternoon/evening that the deal went down. As to they should of left someone there to watch. Who? Do you know who was available? I assume that since it was a CI buy they didn't have a full team just sitting there and most likely was just 2 narc officers. Let's say they went to go do the paperwork, get a warrant, and get together an entry team, because that certainly could be the case, who was supposed to be watching? What should they of assumed about the cars on the street? Do they run every car and if they can't figure out where one belongs call off the warrant? How much time is to be spent on each warrant. How many man hours because some of these possibilities sure seem like it would end up costing more which means less time and money to be used elsewhere.

[EEllis]

Trying to justify the urgency and merit of a "no knock home invasion" to catch a bad guy that wasnt even home during the calamity is preposterous.

This entire operation was destined to fail from the moment the Judge signed the warrant because the "bad guy" was no longer the issue once the warrant was in hand. The issue at hand was executing the dramatic entry with all the cool toys and the main "purpose" of the warrant itself no longer existed.

Urgency is not a factor for a no knock warrant. I haven't really even heard if this was a true no knock or not. Let's break it down. They have a warrant for a BG and they know his most likely location, a house that he sells drugs out of and they also have a search warrant for that location. There are multiple people at that location involved in trafficking and it appears to be something that some other family members are involved in. So how long do they sit and wait with their only SRT team before they serve the warrant? How much of the resources get put on hold while they confirm he is where they think he is? And knowing all we do how can there be no purpose to serving a warrant on a known drug location? I get that people have different opinions on no knocks and forced entry warrants but you don't help yourselves when the rhetoric is inaccurate.

[thenick_ttu]

he could have been guilty of mass murder, that doesn't justify the fact that they took all eyes off the house long enough for him to leave, and for EVERYONE in the house to go to sleep. if you read it, it sounds like it was hours later, like many hours, because no judge is going to want to sign a warrant at 3 AM! so let's say the drug buy went down at 3 PM and the warrant was signed by 5, because they are just speedy that way, that gave them 10 hours!!! You're trying to make it sound like it all happened in 15 minutes, but I'm just not buying it. They still didn't take a look at the cars in front of the house to see who was there? yeh, I"m feeling better everyday about my best friend living in that area.

I'm not "trying" to make it sound like anything. I am just repeating what I heard. No one who knows anything about getting a warrant thinks it takes 15 min to get one. This probably happened around 2 ish so it would of likely been sometime in the late afternoon/evening that the deal went down. As to they should of left someone there to watch. Who? Do you know who was available? I assume that since it was a CI buy they didn't have a full team just sitting there and most likely was just 2 narc officers. Let's say they went to go do the paperwork, get a warrant, and get together an entry team, because that certainly could be the case, who was supposed to be watching? What should they of assumed about the cars on the street? Do they run every car and if they can't figure out where one belongs call off the warrant? How much time is to be spent on each warrant. How many man hours because some of these possibilities sure seem like it would end up costing more which means less time and money to be used elsewhere.

I can't believe you are trying to defend this situation by saying the police are trying to save time and money. It doesn't matter how many man-hours it takes, the police should know for a fact that the suspect is in the house before they perform a no-knock entry. Supposedly, the whole point of the raid is to arrest the suspect, so why wouldn't they make sure he is there? The answer to your question of "who was supposed to be watching" is someone. Somebody should have been watching and they should have been certain that the suspect was inside.

[SewTexas]

I give up guys.....I got sucked in again...I know better

I'm off the thread.

[EEllis]

I can't believe you are trying to defend this situation by saying the police are trying to save time and money. It doesn't matter how many man-hours it takes, the police should know for a fact that the suspect is in the house before they perform a no-knock entry. Supposedly, the whole point of the raid is to arrest the suspect, so why wouldn't they make sure he is there? The answer to your question of "who was supposed to be watching" is someone. Somebody should have been watching and they should have been certain that the suspect was inside.

I didn't. I am saying that some of the comments are off point, wrong, or just one dimensional and lack context and real world understanding. Also you haven't really answered my "questions" have you. "It doesn't matter how many man hours" is a fallacy, absurd on it's face. Of course it does. It's a rural dept with limited funds and every dollar spent one place means taking it away from something else. I'm not arguing with Charles because he is just saying he doesn't like them (no knocks) and doesn't want them to be legal. I may not agree but there isn't anything to argue, that is how he feels. Others are trying to pick apart individual aspects and say "this part is wrong", blame the cops, and then condemn me for disagreeing with what is obviously a subjective statement. In the situation I posited I don't think it should be "required" that someone watch the location until a warrant was obtained. For instance I doubt they could of guarantied the warrant would of even been issued that night. They then would of probably waited a few days and served the warrant then. I don't believe they had 20 officer sitting a donut shop waiting for this warrant. They got a warrant, went to the location where the guy is normally at. Served the warrant. Sure he was gone but they must of also had a search warrant which was served at the same time. If it was because it was a no knock, which we haven't had confirmation that it was a true no knock yet, then say "XXX is what I would like to see happen when police serve a no knock warrant". That the internet experts think that sitting at home with no knowledge of the area, dept, location, or really just about any of the factors involved, think they definitely know better than people there boggle my mind.

[jmra]

No knock warrants should only be used when police know for sure there is a fugitive in the home they are going in, in my opinion.

In view of a rich history of judges who will sign any warrant requested, including no-knock warrants, and an equally rich history of no-knock warrants being abused and overused, no-knock warrants should be made unlawful. Arguing that people cannot be taken into custody outside of their home without greater danger to officers and the public is bogus. It's done all the time. In fact, until the increased militarization of law enforcement and the use of military style tactics and weapons, it was the method of choice.

If anyone doubts that some judges will sign any warrant requests, just consider so-called "no refusal" holidays. While I don't have a problem with arresting and prosecuting drunk drivers, I have a very big problem with a judge sitting by a phone with a pin in his or her hand ready to issue a warrant for every request submitted. Every judge involved in such unconstitutional tactics should be disbarred and prosecuted for official oppression. No end result is worth destroying constitutional protections.

Chas.

Think that about sums it up.

[rbwhatever1]

If the event was important enough to warrant breaching the structure by order of a judge, it should be understood by all to make sure one is at the right location and that the target is in fact at that same location before commencing the assault and putting LEO's and Citizens both in grave danger for nothing. These are very basic things. Breaching a structure occupied by armed and deadly combatants that may also contain innocent citizens is not a game to be taken lightly.

Having a warrant in hand should never imply that the operation should commence if unknown variables exist. If it takes extra manpower or extra time to ensure things are done right so be it. Judgment is paramount and its apparent this particular raid was doomed from the start.

The focus was entirely on the entry and not on the target, since that target wasn't even there. Innocent people injured for nothing is a failure by everyone involved from the Judge down.

I personally believe these warrants can never be justified but until "we the people" cause them to be banned forever we are stuck with them. The least we can do is make sure they are done right. Failures of this magnitude need harsh consequences.

[EEllis]

If the event was important enough to warrant breaching the structure by order of a judge, it should be understood by all to make sure one is at the right location and that the target is in fact at that same location before commencing the assault and putting LEO's and Citizens both in grave danger for nothing. These are very basic things. Breaching a structure occupied by armed and deadly combatants that may also contain innocent citizens is not a game to be taken lightly.

How? How within a reasonable rural police budget can you guarantee such a thing? Mind you that also ignores that they would be a search warrant for the structure as that was the location of the criminal act.

Having a warrant in hand should never imply that the operation should commence if unknown variables exist. If it takes extra manpower or extra time to ensure things are done right so be it. Judgment is paramount and its apparent this particular raid was doomed from the start.

Every operation has unknown variables. Your statement implies resources are unlimited and they just are not. You can't let perfection be the enemy of the good.

The focus was entirely on the entry and not on the target, since that target wasn't even there. Innocent people injured for nothing is a failure by everyone involved from the Judge down.

Let's see drug arrests, multiple people, previous arrests, propensity to violence, known to possess illegal weapons, You might not like no knocks but they are the law there and seemingly this would more than qualify so how this was a failure on the judges part seems to be unsupported. That the "target", though the location was also the target not just the BG, was missing does not mean that the focus was not on getting him. That is a logical fallacy that just doesn't support your statement.

[CHLLady]

There's gotta be some responsibility taking for this, period. This whole thing needs improvement and changes for both safety of the officers and innocents inside.

[jmra]

There's gotta be some responsibility taking for this, period. This whole thing needs improvement and changes for both safety of the officers and innocents inside.

[philip964]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/22/us/georgi ... Stories%29" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Former Deputy indited. Not one who through flash grenade into crib, injuring baby, but deputy who lied to judge to get warrant.

[jmra]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/22/us/georgi ... Stories%29

Former Deputy indited. Not one who through flash grenade into crib, injuring baby, but deputy who lied to judge to get warrant.

And it only took a year.