92 Year Old Woman Goes Out Shooting When Cops Kick Down the Door(Update)

Originally posted by holymoley

Originally posted by kleverone
Did they not know going into this that the only person who would be there would be a 92 year old lady, who I'm sure probably didn't live in the safest neighborhood (wasn't this a drug bust). Probably had her house broken into before and therefore purchased a firearm to protect herself. I hear plenty of Morons on here defending the police, but don't you think they should find out the occupants, their age, maybe take some of that into consideration? I dare any of you to place your great grandparent in that situation and continue to defend those officers! How about a little background research before breaking down someones door. I don't care who it is, someone breaks down my door without identifying themselves, there getting blasted! And of course they have to identify themselves, show me where the Supreme Court overruled that!! MAYBE she didn't hear them, that I can believe but to say that they don't have to identify themselves because they have a warrant is the dumbest thing I have heard all day. LMAO. Stop defending police incompetence!!!!! Or you may be next!!!

check this out. www.law.com...
the supreme court is backing off from the 'knock and announce rule'. got anything else you want me to look up for you?

Yeah, show me where they overuled it, easing up is hardly a repeal.

the drug war would end immediantly
if we started shooting back.

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn

The fact is you never know what the situation inside is going to be like. If it is in a bad neighborhood you Intel could tell you 1 person lives there when there are really five. You put yourself in their shoes and tell me what you would have done based on a small bit of information.

[edit on 22-11-2006 by JamesMcMahn]

The only fact we know right now is that one old lady is dead and three cops got shot.Something didnt go right .
I would have sent a couple of uniformed cops to the door first,after they secured her,then you move into the house.
If she began firing at the police,then i would have pulled back,waited for swat and let them talk her out.Textbook.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
The responses in this thread are astonishing, I cant believe how many people are willing to bend over backwards, state false information and make ridicules assumptions just so that in some way and somehow the Police always come out at fault. Tragic. :shk: As far as I'm concerned they are not at fault, at all, they had the right house and narcotics were recovered. They announced who they were and what their intentions were. As such, the only one at fault here is there person who started shooting first, they got themselves killed.

really? i think youre a bit misguided. perhaps infact, there is something drastically wrong with you? the real point here is, no where did i see mention of ANY drugs being found. and that is the clincher here people, were there any drugs recovered? if so, what and how much? if someone could show me a link that states the above bolded, then by all means the police did their job and we should praise them. if not, there are serious issues that need dealt with, both in the quoted poster AND the police dept.

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn

Originally posted by kleverone
Did they not know going into this that the only person who would be there would be a 92 year old lady, who I'm sure probably didn't live in the safest neighborhood (wasn't this a drug bust). Probably had her house broken into before and therefore purchased a firearm to protect herself. I hear plenty of Morons on here defending the police, but don't you think they should find out the occupants, their age, maybe take some of that into consideration? I dare any of you to place your great grandparent in that situation and continue to defend those officers! How about a little background research before breaking down someones door. I don't care who it is, someone breaks down my door without identifying themselves, there getting blasted! And of course they have to identify themselves, show me where the Supreme Court overruled that!! MAYBE she didn't hear them, that I can believe but to say that they don't have to identify themselves because they have a warrant is the dumbest thing I have heard all day. LMAO. Stop defending police incompetence!!!!! Or you may be next!!!

You do not have to identify yourself while going to serve a warrant if (A) the situation is dangerous (B) you think evidence could possibly be destroyed or (C) the suspects may escape, it is just a good idea to. If it was any of my family I would be greatly angry but I would understand.

Please show me in the aftermath, how any of these rules applied. A.) the situation became dangerous when they barged into someones home unnanouced with weapons, ok they made the situation dangerous, B.) where are the drugs? C.) How is a 92 year old woman going to escape? Did she have a supercharged wheelchair or Rascal? So none of the above apply. Incompetence.

Here is where it states drugs were recovered.

people have too much of a problem with being heard an lettin others be heard. theres alot of HOT water an COLD Water being poured here but not much WARM.....

just saying alot of bickering is going on an not alot of fact finding an problem solving just a bunch of people crying foul.....


DENY IGNORANCE.....

"Investigators also said they found drugs in the home after Johnston was killed. Officer Joe Cobb, a police spokesman, said the type of drug involved would not be disclosed until it was verified by the crime lab."


either she had the drugs, shes hiding drugs, or shes just there an her son is being a arsehead to her, one of the 7 possibilities is prolly the deal, but the evidence remains, DRUGS WERE BOUGHT THERE, BY UNDERCOVER AGENTS, and DRUGS WERE FOUND THERE! SHE OPENED FIRED,, on PO PO, thats a NO NO, DUH!

LOOK before you SHoot! an if you dealing with drugs WHERES YER VEST!



[edit on 22-11-2006 by Tranceopticalinclined]

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn


You may think the SOP is stupid but it works most of the time. I am not going to argue with you anymore it appears that you all just wish to hate all police officers and not look at it from their point of view. I leave you this morning with one bit of wisdom........Accidents happen get over it.

So this was an accident?three wounded cops and a dead 90 year old lady is an accident?
Talk about prejudice.I guess we should just believe whatever the police tell us and thats that.

Did you ever see me post that anywhere?

Originally posted by Quicksilver

Originally posted by kleverone

and maybe tried to shoot them while in the yard. Also who has cleared this lady of any charges? Who know if she was actually trafficking drugs?


yeah and maybe she was an Alien and maybe she was planning to take over the earth. MAYBE!!! Are you serious?? Please tell me your kidding?

[edit on 22-11-2006 by kleverone]

[edit on 22-11-2006 by kleverone]

Their were reports of her shooting out into the yard and again no one has come out to say she wasnt the one trafficking drugs.

Even if they did go in and knew it was a 92yr. women what should they have done. Gone in with hopes and dreams and try to arrest her? It is clear this lady was try to hurt someoen with her firearm.

by the way dont appreciate you calling me or other people morons. Watch it.

[edit on 11*22*2006 by Quicksilver]

Please present to me any witnesses other than the officers who can verify she shot at them in the yard. "No one said she wasn't trafficking drugs" What? are you serious? SO gulity till proven innocent, gotcha

You also say she was trying to hurt someone with her firearm, as opposed to trying to bake a cake for someone with it, gotcha

Moron (noun): Any person incapable of developing beyond a mental age of 8-12.

Which in my opinion, based on your post, qalifies you. I am not using the term to be a smartbutt or antagonist, I am using it in proper context. Are you going to tell me that I cannot have an opinion because you don't like it? Because you statements such as "She was trying to hurt someone with a gun" is the type of observation my 8 year old nephew would make. IF I am lying then feel free to warn me. Otherwise please allow me to state my opinion. Or did the Surpreme court repeal the first amendment as well.

sounds like the police are covering their own, so to speak. it wouldnt be the first time drugs were "found" *PLANTED* to give reason for a bold faced lie, and a horrible mistake. however, i somewhat retract my former comments, in the sense that they "said" drugs were "found" but refuse to identify them until the "lab" verifies the claim. with field drug test kits this reeks of BS.

i guess what confuses me the most is why was it narc agents busting in the door?

at least a few years ago when i lived in omaha, if a no knock was being served it was swat that did it. my guess is that 4-6 guys with mp5's, black vests and helmets might have made it clearer who was coming through the door.

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn
Here is where it states drugs were recovered.

Yes, and I can see that the "type" of drug has yet to be determined. how about Viagra? Or Vicodin? Illegal without a prescription.

[edit on 22-11-2006 by kleverone]

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
sounds like the police are covering their own, so to speak. it wouldnt be the first time drugs were "found" *PLANTED* to give reason for a bold faced lie, and a horrible mistake. however, i somewhat retract my former comments, in the sense that they "said" drugs were "found" but refuse to identify them until the "lab" verifies the claim. with field drug test kits this reeks of BS.

Not reall its SOP to get a lab report before charges can be filed or Press releases can be made.

Well, until what type of drug was recovered, I think we should lay low on this one. But if they end up saying a joint was recovered I won't be surprised. What is really crazy is that is all they really need to justify killing her.

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
...no where did i see mention of ANY drugs being found...

Was it the right address? Police said yes.

The woman's niece, Sarah Dozier, said that she bought her elderly aunt a gun to protect herself and that her aunt had a permit for the gun.

Atlanta Police Asst. Chief Alan Dreher said at a news conference Wednesday that an undercover officer made a drug purchase at Johnston's address late Tuesday afternoon from a male suspect. Officers were able to obtain a search warrant after that.

Dreher said as the officers were executing the search warrant, the officers announced themselves and then forced open the door. Officials said the warrant was a "No Knock" warrant -- meaning that the officers did not knock before forcing open the door, but they did announce themselves.

Dreher said the officers had a legal warrant before they forced open the door. He said they were justified in returning fire when they were fired upon.

Dreher said as soon as the officers forced open the door, Johnston shot at the officers and the officers returned fire to protect themselves. One officer was shot 3 times -- once in the leg, on the side of the face and once in his bulletproof vest. One officer was hit in the leg and another hit in their arm.

Officials said they have not made any arrests in the case and they have not located the male suspect. Dreher said suspected narcotics were recovered from the home but police are awaiting lab results to confirm that.

Dreher said a marked patrol vehicle was parked in front of the residence and the word "Police" was written across the front and back of the narcotics team's vests. He also said only a matter of minutes passed between when officers arrived at the scene and when they forced open the door.

Link

Now, shall we dispense with the bull?

The Police in ever single facet of this case acted lawfully and proper. Even if the old lady was not a criminal or responsible for nay crime prior to the shooting the police respond back in self defense, they acted lawfully, again, notice that they were shot five times before returning fire. At worst this is just a tragic accident which cannot be blamed on the police.

[edit on 22-11-2006 by WestPoint23]

Originally posted by JamesMcMahn

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
sounds like the police are covering their own, so to speak. it wouldnt be the first time drugs were "found" *PLANTED* to give reason for a bold faced lie, and a horrible mistake. however, i somewhat retract my former comments, in the sense that they "said" drugs were "found" but refuse to identify them until the "lab" verifies the claim. with field drug test kits this reeks of BS.

Not reall its SOP to get a lab report before charges can be filed or Press releases can be made.

strange, SOP doesnt apply in any of the other news articles ive read on drug busts. the first report always states what was recovered, how, and why. but im sure this could differ where you are from.

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
...no where did i see mention of ANY drugs being found...

Was it the right address? Police said yes.

The woman's niece, Sarah Dozier, said that she bought her elderly aunt a gun to protect herself and that her aunt had a permit for the gun.

Atlanta Police Asst. Chief Alan Dreher said at a news conference Wednesday that an undercover officer made a drug purchase at Johnston's address late Tuesday afternoon from a male suspect. Officers were able to obtain a search warrant after that.

Dreher said as the officers were executing the search warrant, the officers announced themselves and then forced open the door. Officials said the warrant was a "No Knock" warrant -- meaning that the officers did not knock before forcing open the door, but they did announce themselves.

Dreher said the officers had a legal warrant before they forced open the door. He said they were justified in returning fire when they were fired upon.

Dreher said as soon as the officers forced open the door, Johnston shot at the officers and the officers returned fire to protect themselves. One officer was shot 3 times -- once in the leg, on the side of the face and once in his bulletproof vest. One officer was hit in the leg and another hit in their arm.

Officials said they have not made any arrests in the case and they have not located the male suspect. Dreher said suspected narcotics were recovered from the home but police are awaiting lab results to confirm that.

Dreher said a marked patrol vehicle was parked in front of the residence and the word "Police" was written across the front and back of the narcotics team's vests. He also said only a matter of minutes passed between when officers arrived at the scene and when they forced open the door.

Link

Now, shall we dispense with the bull?

The Police in ever single facet of this case acted lawfully and proper. Even if the old lady was not a criminal or responsible for nay crime prior to the shooting the police respond back in self defense, they acted lawfully, again, notice that they were shot five times before returning fire. At worst this is just a tragic accident which cannot be blamed on the police.

[edit on 22-11-2006 by WestPoint23]

i didnt blame the police for anything, they were shot at,the woman is dead. that is understandbale in my opinion. if i shot at the police, innocent or no, i would expect to get shot at back. this is not what we are debating. it is the VALIDITY of the statements made i am questioning, and your ability to take what they say as gospel just because they have "authority"

Let me repeat this one more time, even if the old lady in question was not involved in any drug activity the police cannot be blamed for what happened. They acted within the law on every single thing and had no choice but to respond when fired upon, again, at worst it's just a terrible accident.

and i agree fully with this. however there is a dead woman, and many things simply do not add up. i dont blame the officers in any way, shape or form. atleast individually. however i DO blame the system for obvious mistakes.