Kitsap (WA) Deputies refuse to show warrant after lying to renters about reason for being at house a

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Feb, 22 2013 @ 04:32 PM
link   
just saw this posted a few hours ago. not a lot of back-story as to why the police are actually there conducting this investigation and i am not sure if that is relevant unless a life was in immediate danger.




posted on Feb, 22 2013 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Could you provide more on the video content, I can't watch. I lived in Kitsap over a few years time. Interested in what this is about.



posted on Feb, 22 2013 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Just another example of authoritarian thugs not complying with laws.

I don't think the guy filming and asking for a warrant has much say considering his mother owned the property. I think this guy wanted to take an opportunity to try and act cool and post a video on the internet claiming he "stood up to the man". Even though his mother asked for a warrant, and if she was indeed the landlord then they should have shown her a warrant.

But I think this was just a couple of people trying to get their 15 minutes of fame.



posted on Feb, 22 2013 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Witness2008
 


the guy videotaping is the brother of the woman whom lives in the home. the home is owned however by the mother. allegedly there was court ordered inspection of the home given to CPS but they refuse to show the warrant even though they are asked nearly 20 times in the video. they just ignore the requests and continue with going through the persons house.



posted on Feb, 22 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by eXia7
 


people obviously record videos with law enforcement all the time in the hopes something will go awry and they can show the world. it boggles my mind as to how the homeowner can request a warrant and they refuse to show her. if this really was a court ordered inspection then the detectives would obviously have a warrant. you would imagine this is something even someone with no law enforcement knowledge would know.



posted on Feb, 22 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   
I live in Kitsap County. There has been no recent news coverage of this incident. Perhaps OP could provide a date so we can do a little research, since all we have is a Youtuve vid and no context at all.

This apparently is a CPS (Child Protective Service) issue. The uniforms were there to "support" the detective in the case. They would not have the warrant themselves. The detective should. The boy doing the filming has no legal status vis-a-vis the property-at all. He doesn't have the right to ask for a warrant. He does not own the property. He does not live at the property. The fact that his mother owns the property is irrelevant.

Looked like Mother appeared on the scene asking for a warrant. It's a bit murky, but apparently Mother also does not live on the property. At one point someone said, "The warrant is for the tenant."

I wouldn't judge this issue without some more facts here, and we have precious little to go on.



posted on Feb, 22 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yetichi
reply to post by eXia7
 


people obviously record videos with law enforcement all the time in the hopes something will go awry and they can show the world. it boggles my mind as to how the homeowner can request a warrant and they refuse to show her. if this really was a court ordered inspection then the detectives would obviously have a warrant. you would imagine this is something even someone with no law enforcement knowledge would know.


Either way, it's still one of the many examples of police not complying with the law, It's good you brought this up, but it'll go in the bin of forgotten relics with all the others I think, sadly.



posted on Feb, 22 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Yetichi
 


Warrants should be based on reliable information if not some type of evidence. Mommy can ask for all the warrants she wants, but the occupants of the address who are being searched should have been shown the warrant. Does not matter who owns the property.

LE, judges and DA's rely on our stupidity of the law and our own rights in order to get away with this kind of action. I still need to see the video and a bit more commentary on the circumstances.



posted on Feb, 22 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
I thought I heard in the video, that it was asked of the officer if a warrant had been shown to the tenant and the answer was no? Is this correct?



posted on Feb, 22 2013 @ 05:43 PM
link   
i know as much as anyone else watching it knows. maybe someone on here knows if the homeowner (the mother) is entitled to see the warrant even if she doesn't reside there?



posted on Feb, 22 2013 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ajay59
I thought I heard in the video, that it was asked of the officer if a warrant had been shown to the tenant and the answer was no? Is this correct?


I thought I heard one of the deputies say, "We wouldn't be here if we didn't."

In any case, I've just completed a search of the local newspapers, including their 'Police Blotter" sections, and there's nothing there yet. The video was just uploaded yesterday. I checked:

The Kitsap Sun
The Port Orchard Independent
The Central Kitsap Reporter
The North Kitsap Herald

The last three are all owned by the same Canadian company and are published twice a week. The Sun is a daily. There is really no indication in the vid of where this took place.
edit on 2/22/2013 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2013 @ 06:57 PM
link   
The fellow on the video arrived after the fact so the real legal stuff is not known to him nor to, us, the viewers. Cops might have broke every rule in the book but we wouldn't know it.

Despite really, really, really, really, really wanting to see that warrant, wanting doesn't change the fact that he just isn't entitled to see it. Being the son of the landlord, uncle to the child involved and brother/brother in law to the renters doesn't change anything.

He wasn't the resident, he wasn't the legal guardian of the child involved and he sure didn't present himself as a legal adviser in the matter.

In other words: It was none of his business



posted on Feb, 23 2013 @ 05:18 AM
link   
reply to post by SkipIntro
 


You're right, but for the wrong reasons. A warrant is issued that lists what is to be searched and will normally include some phrase "persons." So if I am at a friends house and the police raid it, and I ask the magic question, "Officer, am I being detained or am I free to go?" and the cops tell me to sit tight, I am now a subject in that warrant and entitled to see it.

Of course, everyone is overlooking that a court order and a warrant are two different things. One is used to gather evidence, one is used to execute a court decree.



posted on Feb, 23 2013 @ 10:02 PM
link   
From the cameraman: This event took place Wednesday night 2-20-13. I arrived at about 8:30pm after receiving a call from my brother that the sheriffs were there tossing the house and had not shown a warrant and took my niece. At the time in which I showed up I was the authorized to represent the landlord. Per CR 2.3 (d) states, "The peace officer... shall give to the person from whom or from whose premises the property is taken a copy of the warrant".

That being said fine they refused to show me the warrant then they also refused to show the landlord. One of the residents, my sister was told if they did not leave she would be arrested. There were about 7 of us at the home during the recording. We called 911 approximately 5 times and every time we were told a sergeant would be calling us back, never happened.


The daughter was released back to her mother and father less than 48hrs later. It was detective Blankenship who ordered the girl removed. Looks as if CPS took the girl under false pretenses.

FUN FACTS:

1. The mother has serious health issues and was not allowed to take her medication or medical bracelets.

2. Blankenship told me she would call my sister to show her the warrant. WRONG they refused to let them take their phones.

3. All four people at the home asked to see the warrant while they were being told to vacate the property, they were not provided a copy or shown the warrant.

4. According to the Washinton State Constitution Art.1 Sec.7 "No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law". No definitive PROOF of this "lawful authority" (showing of a court-ordered search warrant) was provided to the residents prior to or during police entry.

5. Detective Blankenship, Kitsap County, was the lead detective. Please file all complaints by calling (360) 337-7101.

Please send questions concerns comments to
Socialjustice@outlawradionetwork.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by madtoys101
 


Apparently this had something to do with CPS. Why was CPS involved in the first place? You said the girl was returned within 48 hours. What's up with that? Were the deputies there to "support" CPS or did they have another agenda? Has there been a history of abuse/neglect/accusations/put-something-here with this family? In other words, I'm guessing this is not the first contact these guys have had with LE/CPS, so what went down before? When you say "toss the house" what do you mean? Were they actually looking for something, or were they there to present some sort of court order such as a CPS enforcement action?

A "search warrant" applies to a PLACE. A court warrant of some sort applies to a PERSON. It sounds like this was the latter kind of warrant directed at your sister. If I've guessed correctly here, why would anyone else be entitled to see it? Are you mistaking the rules governing search warrants with court orders in general? I'm just asking because it is very unclear what is going on here from the information you provided.

Do you seriously think that random people on the Internet can complain to the Kitsap County Sheriff's Office because of your vid and what you wrote here? We have no standing in this case whatsoever.
edit on 2/24/2013 by schuyler because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
1

log in

join