It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
This heavily militarized invasion of an innocent family’s home was because incompetent police had raided the wrong house.
During the assault and terrorization, dispatch records show that officers called for a female officer to come to the scene. When the female officer arrived, Diaz, who was completely naked, was then patted down by the female officer and told to spread her legs to be searched.
America can be assured, however, that this sexual abuse and destruction of a family’s home was done in the best interest of public safety, and officers claim that they acted within the confines of their authority.
The only quandary here is this; cops were looking for 36-year-old Shane B. Jackson Jr., who hadn’t lived in the home since February. Diaz had no clue who Jackson was. A simple call to the electric company would have let the police know that the utilities had been switched over to Diaz’ name, months ago.
The fact that they were at the wrong house is only part of their incompetent and brutal blunder, however. These inept barbarians actually arrested Jackson 2 weeks prior to the raid!
At about 5:30 a.m. Wednesday, the Hillside Street woman awoke to the sound of somebody busting down her apartment door. Moments later, the 23-year-old found herself kneeling, her frightened daughters huddling close to her, as police officers with helmets and shields pointed "big guns" in her direction.
“Stop (expletive) crying and take care of your (expletive) kids,” she quoted one officer as saying. It would be 10 minutes, she said, before officers allowed her to cover herself up.
“My (7-year-old) daughter was freaking out,” Ms. Diaz said Thursday as her other daughter, 18-month-old Brieanne, sat in her lap. “She was just shaking, and she couldn’t stop.”
The state police detectives and Worcester SWAT team who raided Ms. Diaz’ apartment Wednesday did so on a “no-knock” warrant procured in Central District Court.
Police seized nothing during the raid, documents show, arrested no one, and did not find the man the warrant authorized them to find or the two guns he allegedly possessed.
The reason, Ms. Diaz and her roommates say, is that the man no longer lives in that apartment, and they have never seen him.
“This botched gun raid, without any doubt, is about an innocent family with two children – one disabled - who were utterly terrorized and abused as a result of the grossly reckless conduct exhibited by (police),” charged lawyer Hector E. Pineiro. “There was virtually no due diligence and surveillance done to ensure that they got the right people.”
Mr. Alequin said he suffered a minor back injury, and Mr. Matos said doctors told him his wrist – which was fractured weeks ago but was healing – was re-fractured.
“I screamed and tried to explain my wrist was messed up,” he said. “They told me to shut the (expletive) up.”
Police radio transmissions show that shortly after 5:30 a.m., Worcester police at the scene requested a female officer come to 17 Hillside St.
Ms. Diaz said when the female officer arrived, she conducted a pat frisk of her nude body, including asking her to spread her legs.
“She questioned (the others) why she had to search me if I was naked,” Ms. Diaz said. “They were like, ‘Search her anyway.’”
Ms. Diaz was disturbed when informed by a reporter that courthouse records show that Worcester police had arrested Mr. Jackson on a theft warrant two weeks ago.
In the police log entry for the arrest – which occurred on Southgate Street on Aug. 6 – officers list Mr. Jackson’s address as 71 Sylvan St.
That’s the same address listed for Mr. Jackson in multiple court cases open against him.
“Oh my God,” Ms. Diaz said after she learned of the arrest. “How can they say he lives in my apartment if he got arrested before they raided it?”
Indianapolis, Ind. – In a case of first impression, David Cupello v. State of Indiana, the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed David Cupello’s conviction on charges of battery on a law enforcement officer. The court found that he exercised reasonable force under an amendment to Indiana law which legalized using force against “public servants” that unlawfully enter another person’s property.
The law states:
(i) A person is justified in using reasonable force against a public servant if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary to:
(1) protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force;
(2) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful entry of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle; or
(3) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person’s possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person’s immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect.
Indiana recognized the sacred nature of an individual’s residence and took immediate action to “recognize the unique character of a citizen’s home and to ensure that a citizen feels secure in his or her own home against unlawful intrusion by another individual or a public servant.”
originally posted by: Reallyfolks
a reply to: infolurker
My question to LEO's ... what if the homeowner of a house you are falsely raiding has a firearm. Owner hears door broken down and comes out with a pistol.
You are going to kill them? A man or woman in their own home in the middle of the night because you refuse to do your freeking jobs thoroughly?