TexasCHLforum.com

Henderson police arrested a family for refusing to let officers use their homes as lookouts for a domestic violence investigation of their neighbors, the family claims in court.

"Defendant Officer David Cawthorn outlined the defendants' plan in his official report: 'It was determined to move to 367 Evening Side and attempt to contact Mitchell. If Mitchell answered the door he would be asked to leave. If he refused to leave he would be arrested for Obstructing a Police Officer. If Mitchell refused to answer the door, force entry would be made and Mitchell would be arrested.'"

"Although plaintiff Anthony Mitchell was lying motionless on the ground and posed no threat, officers, including Officer David Cawthorn, then fired multiple 'pepperball' rounds at plaintiff as he lay defenseless on the floor of his living room. Anthony Mitchell was struck at least three times by shots fired from close range, injuring him and causing him severe pain."

http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/07/03/59061.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Is federal court the right venue for this?

I assume this is the homeowners version but it is pretty horrible.

If the description of the officer's intended actions are accurate as stated from their "official plan", they're in big trouble.
Not only should they be sued, they should be charged with civil rights violations.

hmmmm, where was that?? 4th Amendment seems to come to mind.

Those cops were pretty dumb to plan on arresting the homeowner from the get-go.
With no more information that this, the cops are way wrong.
But they didn't do this on their own; someone higher up the food chain was calling the shots.

LabRat

I hope the plaintiffs leave that courtroom wealthy, and the cops indicted

Can you be convicted of violating the 3rd Amendment? Does it come with prison time or is it only a civil penalty?

This kind of unconstitutional police oppression illegally busting into homes is going to get police officers shot someday. I'd hate to see that unfortunate outcome, but it is only a question of time. Of course, the lawful homeowner who reacts in such a fashion will probably never live to pursue his claim in court, so it will be a double tragedy.

These "officers" must do their training at the Las Vegas Costco.

Based on the limited account of events, a question does come to mind. If a hostage situation develops next door to my house and the local swat team wants to set up in my house, would I be able to refuse their request? What are my rights/responsibilities in such a situation?

TexasCajun wrote:Based on the limited account of events, a question does come to mind. If a hostage situation develops next door to my house and the local swat team wants to set up in my house, would I be able to refuse their request? What are my rights/responsibilities in such a situation?

My bet is, they will remove you with our without your consent for "your safety" .. once your gone. well the house will be seed as they see fit.

The forced out bit would be a double edge deal.. on one hand if they did ask, you refuse, and not then force you out and you were hit by a stray round, theirs or the BG,,, some ambulance chaser would find the relatives and get them to sue.. claiming you were not "protected" and endangered by LEO's actions..

On the other hand.. being a mentally sufficient stable adult home owner, I should get to make my own choices on my safety...and stay in my own home if I so choose. Forced evacuation is NOT something I believe in, natural or man made disaster.. BUT if the home owner refuses to leave when so advised, they give up the right to later state assistance and rescue.

When I read inflammatory story's like this, even when they fit my preconceived notion of what I believe. I also think.... this is only one side.... every story has three sides, them, the other them, and somewhere in between the truth.

I want to get upset at what i read in the OP..... but know there is always more to the story.... (ive been bit by that right here in this forum on at least one occasion)

MechAg94 wrote:Is federal court the right venue for this?

I assume this is the homeowners version but it is pretty horrible.

Don't know about this alleged incident, but you always should sue the police in federal court.

MechAg94 wrote:Is federal court the right venue for this?

I assume this is the homeowners version but it is pretty horrible.

As a civil rights violation under the 3rd & 4th Amendments, I would think so.

texanjoker wrote:

MechAg94 wrote:Is federal court the right venue for this?

I assume this is the homeowners version but it is pretty horrible.

Don't know about this alleged incident, but you always should sue the police in federal court.

Huh? Why is that?

E.Marquez wrote:When I read inflammatory story's like this, even when they fit my preconceived notion of what I believe. I also think.... this is only one side.... every story has three sides, them, the other them, and somewhere in between the truth.

I want to get upset at what i read in the OP..... but know there is always more to the story.... (ive been bit by that right here in this forum on at least one occasion)

While I agree completely with your sentiment, and it's always wise advice, I wonder if this story is as inflammatory as you think? The story seems replete with quotes from a court pleading. IANAL, but I don't think you can lie about the facts in a court pleading, can you? When you're representing certain facts to a court, you can make grandiose claims about how your client has suffered, but I don't think you can misrepresent material facts. As an officer of the court, aren't those things sworn to with regard to their accuracy?

On a side note, is there something in the water in Nevada? It seems the cops there are not like our cops here.

Officers need to be fired and banned from ever working as a Law Officers.
The city of Henderson should be forced to pay a couple of million and forced to retrain their Police Dept in US Constitutional Law.

baldeagle wrote:It seems the cops there are not like our cops here.

You mean they don't give roadside cavity searches?