It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Hidden Problems In The Ruling (Knock And Announce Case)

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Grover,
You need to move. As you have described it, it is either Crack, Heroin or Meth.

Either one, it is a VERY volatile situation, and consider this, if it is Meth and they are cooking it on site, you stand to suffer from the INCREDIBLY dangerous health risks, not to mention the explosion risk.

Last year Meth passed Hurricanes and tornadoes as the number one killer of Mobile Homes.

That is an actual statistic.

If I can help with any information, (I'm somewhat of an expert on Narcotics) Please feel free to ask me. I will help if I can.

Take Good Care my Friend

Semper




posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Semper I think I figured out the disagreement here. When the supreme court decides on something like this, they base it off of the case, rather then the issue. SO in other words they overturned a ruling that had a much more wider effect because of a special case.

This case by itself, may have been justifiable. The ruling though has overturned more then just this case, so that cases with a much wider circumstance may not be seen because of the case they ruled on. Im having a hard time trying to describe this.

Its like they ruled on a case that was border line, which overturned a ruling that deals with a much wider array of cases that should be considered the same. Do you get what Im trying to say?



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 11:57 AM
link   
I do.

And we will have to wait and see if it is just that.

I'm not sure that after reading the ruling, (Leagaleeze) I can say with conviction that they "overturned" anything. It appears to me that they intentionally worded it to remain within the confines of that specific case.

Yet again, I could be wrong.

Semper



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 12:38 PM
link   
wellI can almost say definately that it is not meth, I have no tolerance for solvents of any sort, I chase my girl friend out onto the porch when she breaks out the finger nail polish remover and from what I have heard, meth labs are quite pungent in that regards. I agree it is a serious situition but I cannot afford to move, I have just finished my VA Vocational Rehab training, graduated with an Asso. in graphic design but have not gotten a job yet so financially it is not an option, fortunately it is early enough on that with the community networking I have been doing, we will be able to force them out, if they are here at the end of the summer I will be surprised, hell the end of next month is doable, if we wait and allow them to become more established, thats another story but I cannot ignore this even if I wanted to, its literally right outside my door. They will be gone though.



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   
P.S. thanks for the concern semper, I appericate that. I know I am not intimadating so me getting into it as it were is laughable, I am smart, thats my strength and I plan to network their skanky asses out of here
will keep you infomed though.



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by grover
This is something I can relate to in a personal way. I rent, and over the past month or so a gang has moved in upstairs and is in the process of turning my little corner into an open air drug market and prostituition center. They have muscle (2 men with a pitbull) hanging literally outside my livingroom and kitchen windows. I am an old hippy liberal but this is a beast of an entirely different color, its either meth, or crack or smack or all of the above (and this is as a rule a nice neighborhood, so this is an invasion) I have contacted the local neighborhood forum, the local crime watch commitee, my landlord, the police in gereral and the vice squad, the local newspaper, businesses and tv stations. There is not much more that I can do without drawing attention to myself that would put my life in danger and the police say that they cannot raid without probable cause (though if you were to ask anyone within 2 blocks of here they would tell you what is happening) so while I am a firm believer in the police or other instituitions foloowing strict guidelines, this brings the situition home in a way that abstractions never will.

grover

The only thing I can suggest is that you somehow find someone in the police dep't that will take your situation seriously. Go as far up the chain as necessary. You can't tackle those types alone, very difficult. Don't reveal yourself; Don't endanger yourself; the worst that could happen is that you will have to move. But you shouldn't have to do so, imo.

Good luck...



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 01:00 PM
link   
I see this ruling as a move to stop the "get out of jail free" motions defense attorneys use for their clients.

A minor mistake by hardworking law enforcement should not jeopardize the whole case.


They had a warrant, what's the difference if they knocked or not?

Same thing when an accused person confesses. The confession should be valid with or without a lawyer.



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 01:07 PM
link   


Same thing when an accused person confesses. The confession should be valid with or without a lawyer.


Big difference. A confession obtained improperly should never be admissible.

When the police are looking for 'some black guy' and they happen to find one, what's preventing them from leaning on him until he confesses? What's to prevent the cops from promising the moon and the stars in exchange for a confession, and then pulling the rug out from under the one who confessed?

The cops like confessions, it makes their job a whole hell of a lot easier.

If they have to beat you with a phone book, or promise you a private cell, or threaten you with castration to get it, who cares, right? I mean, as long as it's not happening to you...

They say "You can confess to this robbery, or we can pin these six unsolved murders on you - your choice." What's an innocent man to do?

I can understand doing away with the formality of a ten-second waiting period between the announcement and entry, but this is a whole different issue you're raising.



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne


Same thing when an accused person confesses. The confession should be valid with or without a lawyer.


Big difference. A confession obtained improperly should never be admissible.



Good point!

But there are times when a criminal is apprehended and starts running his mouth and confessess. Then all of a sudden they lawyer up and recant their confession.
Remember Joseph Coury?

But you are right, I wouldn't put this in the same category...as of now.



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by grover
This is something I can relate to in a personal way. I rent, and over the past month or so a gang has moved in upstairs and is in the process of turning my little corner into an open air drug market and prostituition center. They have muscle (2 men with a pitbull) hanging literally outside my livingroom and kitchen windows. I am an old hippy liberal but this is a beast of an entirely different color, its either meth, or crack or smack or all of the above (and this is as a rule a nice neighborhood, so this is an invasion) I have contacted the local neighborhood forum, the local crime watch commitee, my landlord, the police in gereral and the vice squad, the local newspaper, businesses and tv stations. There is not much more that I can do without drawing attention to myself that would put my life in danger and the police say that they cannot raid without probable cause (though if you were to ask anyone within 2 blocks of here they would tell you what is happening) so while I am a firm believer in the police or other instituitions foloowing strict guidelines, this brings the situition home in a way that abstractions never will.

grover

The only thing I can suggest is that you somehow find someone in the police dep't that will take your situation seriously. Go as far up the chain as necessary. You can't tackle those types alone, very difficult. Don't reveal yourself; Don't endanger yourself; the worst that could happen is that you will have to move. But you shouldn't have to do so, imo.


Thank you josbecky...That is exactly what i am trying to do...as I mentioned earlier I have contacted my landlord, the vice squad, the local neighborhood forum, the local crime watch committee, individual neighbors, neighborhood businesses, the local TV stations and the local paper and will continue pressuring the police. I know I can't take them on alone and I have no intention of trying, but I also know that the police won't take it seriously unless the whole neighborhood is involved and that is what I am trying. I live in the local neighborhood center, and we have always had some problems but generally it is a nice area with a mix of rental and owned property (I am one of the local eccentrics and as such am well known LOL) plus it is a major city throughfare from the burps to downtown so it won't last. But I am going to be careful, learned years agao I am not a fighter. Thanks for the concern though. appericate it.

Good luck...



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 04:02 PM
link   
What if you shoot a police officer as he busts down your door because you had no idea he was serving a warrant? If I hear my door crashing down the first thing I will do is find some means to protect myself. Even if they are shouting "police, police", how do you really know? What about if home invaders start shouting "police, police" as they kick down your door?

I think it's safer if police give reasonable notification beforehand.

The police should use robots and just do knock warrants. I think the robots are cheap enough now for every police department to afford them.

Knock, Announce yourselves, Send the robot in if they open, bust down the door and send the robot in if they dont open, tell everyone inside to come out, and then conduct your search.

Not many bad guy use unmanned robots to probe out their home invasion before entering. It might help ease the confusion a little by people who could just honestly be defending themselves by giving them 10-20 seconds to recognize the situation they are in and that the police actually are serving a warrant, versus police impersonators or home invaders.


[edit on 18-6-2006 by ImplementOfWar]



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne


Same thing when an accused person confesses. The confession should be valid with or without a lawyer.


Big difference. A confession obtained improperly should never be admissible.

When the police are looking for 'some black guy' and they happen to find one, what's preventing them from leaning on him until he confesses? What's to prevent the cops from promising the moon and the stars in exchange for a confession, and then pulling the rug out from under the one who confessed?

The cops like confessions, it makes their job a whole hell of a lot easier.

If they have to beat you with a phone book, or promise you a private cell, or threaten you with castration to get it, who cares, right? I mean, as long as it's not happening to you...

They say "You can confess to this robbery, or we can pin these six unsolved murders on you - your choice." What's an innocent man to do?

I can understand doing away with the formality of a ten-second waiting period between the announcement and entry, but this is a whole different issue you're raising.


While I can not remember beating anyone, with or without a phone book, and I am sure I have never threatened castration, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, I believe the checks and balances are there for good reason.

Though not as flashy as believing that the Police beat the confession out of them, there are a lot of people out there that will just confess to anything and everything. But that is off topic.

It is amazing how often when you knock, they just say "come in." Then there is no obligation to wait any longer. I still hold the Knock, Announce and wait is necessary except under certain circumstances.

Semper



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
It is amazing how often when you knock, they just say "come in." Then there is no obligation to wait any longer. I still hold the Knock, Announce and wait is necessary except under certain circumstances.

Semper


lol "come in"? Id look at the cop next to me and go "I wonder if this guy has a sawed off ready" the first time that happens. Lol I think I would be in utter shock to hear that. "POLICE OPEN UP!!" then "come in" lol I wouldn't know what to do.



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Happens a lot. I have always attributed it to an automatic reflex action. Again the beauty is that when they say come in, it rules the warrant unnecessary. No possibility of a negative ruling there.

There is always a lot of BIG talk about I would do this and I would do that, if the POLICE ever come kicking in my door. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Right!!!! I can tell you exactly what they DO DO. Mostly they DO DO in their pants is what they do. All of that talk and macho grandstanding goes away in an instant the moment a professional team enters and clears your entire home in seconds.

As the point man I have caught them with the gun under the pillow, yet the entry froze them and that is where it remained until we recovered it.

Just some more thoughts.

Semper



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Well semper, josbecky...my networking is paying off, my landlord informed me that their 2nd month into their lease they are already behind in the rent so he is going to exercise his option and go ahead and evict them. Alot could still happen in the next month but police presence has picked up around his considerably and they are laying lower. Saturday evening I walked outside (after a few beers) to find their prostitute hanging out under the tree outside my window and I bellowed "Damnit ya can't even step outside your own door without tripping over some skanky assed whore. Whats the world coming to?"
she quicky disappeared and hasn't been seen since. I am sure she's still around but damn that felt ogood.



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4
Good point!

But there are times when a criminal is apprehended and starts running his mouth and confessess. Then all of a sudden they lawyer up and recant their confession.
Remember Joseph Coury?

But you are right, I wouldn't put this in the same category...as of now.


Our local police have a nice tactic for this. The video camera. From the time someone is taken into custody they are never off of the camera. They have them in the cars, in the station, all of the offices and interrogation areas and even in the cells. A person is never off of the camera for more than a few seconds at the most. I drunk said that two cops beat him up in his cell and threatened to sue, the lawyer he hired backed off when he was shown the video of the guy punching himself in the face.



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 04:44 PM
link   
Thank Goodness Grover!!!!!
And where do you live and do you know what she charges?? Purely for research purposes you understand!!! LOL

I agree that the cameras are a huge step in the right direction.

Just heard the the Court made some other rulings today. One was accepting the 911 tape in lieu of facing an accuser in certain circumstances. Anyone know the specifics?

I am beginning to be a little troubled by some of these rulings, and HECK, I am a staunch Republican. Go Figure.

Semper



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 05:28 PM
link   
Well the 911 recordings are now allowed in cases of domestic violence, especially in cases where the victim (usually women but I have seen some pretty badly abused men too) refuses to testify. I am the liberal and i have to salute this one...as far as i am concerned there is only one sexual perversion and that is brutality. If you think about it brutality covers all the other bases, child abuse, spousal abuse, rape, incest, sex murders etc. and if someone is too cowed to testify, there has to be some way to bring the bastard to justice. So this is good...still I agree semper, alot of these rulings are too easily manulipated to intrude into areas they shouldn't. Thing is when the right fumes and fusses about liberal activist judges, they convienintly forget, the vast majority were appointed by republican presidents, and if they were replaced, the only real difference would be conservative activist judges and no amount of disingunity will convience me otherwise. And Thanks again semper for your support. They aren't out yet but bet ya they won't fight their evictions either



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 11:40 PM
link   
Well there is no secret that I am a hard right wing republican, but everything in the world needs balance.

It appears, at least initially, that the balance has tipped in the SC, and I for one am not comfortable with that.

I don't want a country where everyone agrees with me, a country of "yes sir" robots. I prefer free thinkers and those with convictions different from mine.

I guess only time will tell, and there really isn't much we can do about the SC anyway.

Semper



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Open_Minded Skeptic
I see this as a very dangerous decision. Grim, you have a good point about the difference in the degree of 'justice' the Court seems to promote. It appears justice is only for the few.

And the comments both you guys have made show what I believe is a major impetus behind this... the so-called war on drugs. You both spoke of 'flushing evidence down the toilet'. What other kind of evidence is likely to be flushable?

So we have the increased possibility of police busting into homes without first identifying themselves. This could very easily result in immediate escalation into severe violence, with high possibility of deaths, both of officers and citizens. Officers in the execution of their jobs. Quite possibly innocent citizens.

And for what? Is a drug bust worth an officer's life? Especially if the amounts involved are so miniscule that they could be flushed effectively? I respectfully submit not.

Add in the virtual certainty of hitting the occasional wrong house, and the occasional 'bad' warrant, i.e. issued via corruption in high places. Probably not a large number of either of these, but 1 is too many.

I just don't think the potential costs are worth it. I see this more as another creeping step on the road of diminished freedom. Especially in light of the fact this decision is a 180-degree departure from legal precedent of what, around 100 years? Something on that order.

I consider this to be a terrible decision. Sadly, I am not surprised by it.


You have voted Open_Minded Skeptic for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

As usual, people here are falling along party lines with respect to the "kicking ass and taking names" crowd. I would remind semper and the rest that obtaining a warrant is not obtaining a verdict of guilt and that often (see the whistleblower case aptly referenced earlier by Grim) cops purposely falsify affidavits to obtain their desired warrant resulting in a warrant issuing which is not based upon probable cause or even a reasonable suspicion but rather upon fraud. And in that case, who is the criminal? The crack smoker or the cop?

There are countless incidents where cops and civilians have been killed in executing warrants. Semper apparently things catching some dead-beat with a gram of blow is worth dying - or killing - for. And remember where you often get your info. supporting the warrant from - a CI who is often a drug using, drug dealing scum bag himself with either an ax to grind or a few bucks to make.

No knock warrants simply escalate the probability that mistakes costing lives will be made. It's a nod to the existing and growing police state. Ah well, getchyer glock on and party it up, eh kids? Bang, you're dead.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join