Another No-Knock Warrant "Success" Story

[rivan]

Originally posted by: MrPickins
Very sad.

No-knock warrants shouldn't be allowed.

Knee jerk reaction, and exactly what the author of that article wants you to think.

Would you prefer the cops have to knock and wait on the porch while a drug dealer flushes his stash and loads the Uzi?

 

[randay]

one less scumbag off the street. too bad hes still alive though.

 

[SuperjetMatt]

None are okay.

There should be accountability. There should be steps taken to reduce errors and keep everyone involved (cops and the public) safe and just as importantly, free. It will never be zero.

My problem is that posts like this, based on slanted, inflammatory articles like that, do absolutely nothing to help the situation. The "journalist" that wrote that didn't talk at all about the law's side of the story because the law didn't comment much on their side of the story (because they're more interested in the outcome of the trial than the newspaper piece).

There's also only very rarely incontrovertible proof available for people breaking the law like this. I'd saw a narcotics officer's testimony is pretty good to go from. If we're not going to place some public trust in those guys then we've got bigger issues as a society than a few bad cops.

Also, how many SWAT operations like this go in on a year without injury? If the rate of injury of the public/perps is under 1%, I'd call that pretty good. How many SWAT operations are done per year that DO turn up (and break up) drug dealers? If it's over 95%, I'd call that pretty good, too.

Good points.

However, I'll add to the flames: We do indeed have much larger issues of trust with the police, especially in light of justice & police scandals that are now being uncovered.
Example: The Dallas (or Austin? CR) prosecutor's office of the 70's and 80's, and Houston's crime lab.

 

[QueBert]

as "bad" as he might have been, he pales in comparison to a lot of police officers. They are the real thugs, and they have way more power than any gangster ever will.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: Juno
geez, i have A LOT of zipoloc bags to store my clay materials.

I do too. And I have a digital scale.

I'm not on house arrest, under indictment for receiving stolen goods, have prior DWIs and a drug problem. I also don't have "several roommates, many of whom had had recent run-ins with the law".

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: SuperjetMatt

None are okay.

There should be accountability. There should be steps taken to reduce errors and keep everyone involved (cops and the public) safe and just as importantly, free. It will never be zero.

My problem is that posts like this, based on slanted, inflammatory articles like that, do absolutely nothing to help the situation. The "journalist" that wrote that didn't talk at all about the law's side of the story because the law didn't comment much on their side of the story (because they're more interested in the outcome of the trial than the newspaper piece).

There's also only very rarely incontrovertible proof available for people breaking the law like this. I'd saw a narcotics officer's testimony is pretty good to go from. If we're not going to place some public trust in those guys then we've got bigger issues as a society than a few bad cops.

Also, how many SWAT operations like this go in on a year without injury? If the rate of injury of the public/perps is under 1%, I'd call that pretty good. How many SWAT operations are done per year that DO turn up (and break up) drug dealers? If it's over 95%, I'd call that pretty good, too.

Good points.

However, I'll add to the flames: We do indeed have much larger issues of trust with the police, especially in light of justice & police scandals that are now being uncovered.
Example: The Dallas (or Austin? CR) prosecutor's office of the 70's and 80's, and Houston's crime lab.

I'll agree with you that there's a larger issue with police trust, as brilliantly illustrated by QueBert's post below yours:

Originally posted by: QueBert
as "bad" as he might have been, he pales in comparison to a lot of police officers. They are the real thugs, and they have way more power than any gangster ever will.

I think it's a daily struggle for police departments out there - corruption is out there. It's obviously more pervasive in some departments than in others, and I'm not equipped to point out which.

All I can say is that, over all, I've had overwhelmingly positive interactions with the cops I've dealt with in my life. I empathize with their position and understand that they have to be constantly on guard for physical danger, and as a result I'm especially aware of my body language when dealing with cops (I'm a big guy and can be unintentionally physically intimidating). I've been arrested a number of times over traffic tickets (I had a BAD lead foot and a "if I ignore it, maybe it'll go away" attitude about them in my early 20s) and again, have found that in general, cops are just doing their job, and like most people if you treat them with respect they'll react in kind.

I think there should be high standards for ethics for cops. It's difficult to, ahem, "police", however, while also balancing manpower/coverage/budgets. That doesn't give the people doing it a pass - I'm just glad it's not my job.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: Agentbolt

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: rivan
YAJPIHCT!

(Yet another jpeyton I hate cops thread!)

They're not infallible. Neither is the system within which they operate. I'm curious how you'd propose to "fix" what you see as broken.

lets see:

hold them accountable
not charge someone who is defending there home and protocting loved ones.
repair any damage done
apologize
make sure they have the correct fucking place?

just a few off the top of my head

Be careful, that's WAY too many reasonable responses. Rivan can't handle his precious cops being corrected that many different ways at once, it'll make his brain explode.

My precious cops? Look, I do very often come to the defense of cops on these boards, but make no mistake - I want them held accountable when they make mistakes or intentionally abuse the authority granted their position.

Instead of trying to insult me or my intellect, why don't you answer my questions? Until then, kindly piss off.

Waggy -

hold them accountable

As it relates to this case, who should be held accountable, and how so? The SWAT team that had no part in investigating the search warrant? The detective/department who applied for the warrant? The judge who signed the warrant?

There should be accountability here, I just want it to end up on the right set of shoulders.

The SWAT team was doing their job - serving a no-knock warrant on a drug house. They didn't do ANY of the investigation. They also (are supposed to) yell who they are when entering. There's a cop saying there were drugs sold from the residence. Serving a warrant on a (as far as the SWAT knew) drug house with lollipops doesn't work very well.

The detective that signed the affadavit of drug sales may have lied. Maybe he didn't.

The judge was weighing the sworn word of the detective and the property/owner's prior problems with the law when he signed the warrant.

not charge someone who is defending there home and protocting loved ones.

Agreed. If he's really the upright citizen that INCREDIBLY slanted article is making him out to be. Given the first few paragraphs of descriptions, this is a pretty rough dude; on house arrest, DWIs, an allegedly stolen car.

None of that adds up to him giving up any of his rights, but neither does it put cops in a position of thinking that, if there are drugs being sold there, it would be a good idea to call before stopping by.

repair any damage done
apologize

Agreed, if he's cleared of any wrongdoing on the initial cause for the warrant.

make sure they have the correct fucking place?

Who? The SWAT team had exactly the place on the warrant. They showed up, they did their job, and in hindsight it's a cluster - but I don't see how it's the SWAT team's fault at all.

not going to try to post in qoutes heh.


1) hold who accountable? i agree the swat team is not to blame (never said they were either). BUT the judge and invistagator needs to do actual work. the judge should have denied the warrent based on little proof.

2) who cares he has a checkered past? that does not deny him the right to protect his family. They found NOTHING in the apartment adn are not trying to find something to charge him so they don't look like idiots.

3)i agree

4) Again nobody is blaming the Swat team so quit trying to push that argument. I NEVER said it was there fault. and look to 1 about this

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: waggy
not going to try to post in qoutes heh.


1) hold who accountable? i agree the swat team is not to blame (never said they were either). BUT the judge and invistagator needs to do actual work. the judge should have denied the warrent based on little proof.

2) who cares he has a checkered past? that does not deny him the right to protect his family. They found NOTHING in the apartment adn are not trying to find something to charge him so they don't look like idiots.

3)i agree

4) Again nobody is blaming the Swat team so quit trying to push that argument. I NEVER said it was there fault. and look to 1 about this

1) I wouldn't call a narcotics sworn statement "little proof". Just because there were no drugs found on the premises doesn't mean there weren't any before.

2) Who cares about a checkered past? Well, the cops/judge should - looking at someone's past gives them a good idea of how they'll react when faced with a warrant. Past behavior isn't a guarantee of future behavior, but it's a good place to start. Credit card companies sure do operate that way.

3)

4) You're not - but you're actually not who I was originally asking for solutions from. And "blame the cops" is the usual warcry threads like this march to, whether it's botched warrants, tazers or "I wasn't speeding!" tickets.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: Baked

Originally posted by: jpeyton
I have a digital scale (used for postage) in my office and a container of Ziploc plastic baggies in my kitchen. Should I fear for my life?

Do you hang out w/ loser car thieves and gangster wannabe like this guy? Normal people don't get raided by police. Look at this guy's record and who he hangs out with. He brought the shit on himself.

I'm usually all in favor of what cops do, but no knock warrants are bullshit. What if they no-knock the wrong house?
I know I have done nothing illegal, and I sleep with a gun in arms reach. If I heard someone breaking into my house in the middle of the night and there is no repeated announcement of POLICE, Cops are going to get peppered with 0 buck and the third round out (if I live long enough) is going to royally fuck someone up, body armor or not, since the 3rd round in the tube is a hollow point slug.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: waggy
not going to try to post in qoutes heh.


1) hold who accountable? i agree the swat team is not to blame (never said they were either). BUT the judge and invistagator needs to do actual work. the judge should have denied the warrent based on little proof.

2) who cares he has a checkered past? that does not deny him the right to protect his family. They found NOTHING in the apartment adn are not trying to find something to charge him so they don't look like idiots.

3)i agree

4) Again nobody is blaming the Swat team so quit trying to push that argument. I NEVER said it was there fault. and look to 1 about this

1) I wouldn't call a narcotics sworn statement "little proof". Just because there were no drugs found on the premises doesn't mean there weren't any before.

2) Who cares about a checkered past? Well, the cops/judge should - looking at someone's past gives them a good idea of how they'll react when faced with a warrant. Past behavior isn't a guarantee of future behavior, but it's a good place to start. Credit card companies sure do operate that way.

3)

4) You're not - but you're actually not who I was originally asking for solutions from. And "blame the cops" is the usual warcry threads like this march to, whether it's botched warrants, tazers or "I wasn't speeding!" tickets.

no a cops word is NOT enough proof to get a warrent and it NEVER should be.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

Originally posted by: Baked

Originally posted by: jpeyton
I have a digital scale (used for postage) in my office and a container of Ziploc plastic baggies in my kitchen. Should I fear for my life?

Do you hang out w/ loser car thieves and gangster wannabe like this guy? Normal people don't get raided by police. Look at this guy's record and who he hangs out with. He brought the shit on himself.

I'm usually all in favor of what cops do, but no knock warrants are bullshit. What if they no-knock the wrong house?
I know I have done nothing illegal, and I sleep with a gun in arms reach. If I heard someone breaking into my house in the middle of the night and there is no repeated announcement of POLICE, Cops are going to get peppered with 0 buck and the third round out (if I live long enough) is going to royally fuck someone up, body armor or not, since the 3rd round in the tube is a hollow point slug.

The difference between "someone breaking into your house" and an entire team of SWAT dudes breaking down the door, throwing flash bangs and screaming "GET DOWN" should be fairly apparent to even the laziest observer.

That said, I'm all for defending your home. With your weapon(s) of choice.

 

[upsciLLion]

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: MrPickins
Very sad.

No-knock warrants shouldn't be allowed.

Knee jerk reaction, and exactly what the author of that article wants you to think.

Would you prefer the cops have to knock and wait on the porch while a drug dealer flushes his stash and loads the Uzi?

It's highly likely that the dude leaves his house from time to time. He probably doesn't even take the Uzi with him! Why not arrest him in his front yard and then search his house without risking anyone's life?

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: waggy
no a cops word is NOT enough proof to get a warrent and it NEVER should be.

Certainly there's the possibility that investigator lied, but if he did, his career's going to go down the pooper when this all shakes out.

That may or may not be all the evidence the city/judge had to go on. If there's more evidence, we can be sure we won't hear about it because it won't make huge headlines. It'll just be another case of some dude getting busted for dealing out of his house.

That's part of my issue with all this - only the crappy stuff makes it to the news. You don't hear about the 99% of the time where the cops are trying to clear drug houses out of neighborhoods, you don't hear about the times cops make legit arrests.

You only hear about the fuckups... I used to have a boss that way - he'd only really talk to me when something went wrong. Usually that talking involved a form (sometimes a whole new process would be implemented, with it's own form!) getting filled out. It's a bad environment to work in.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: MrPickins
Very sad.

No-knock warrants shouldn't be allowed.

Knee jerk reaction, and exactly what the author of that article wants you to think.

Would you prefer the cops have to knock and wait on the porch while a drug dealer flushes his stash and loads the Uzi?

Part of me wishes a Swat team mistakenly executes a no-knock search on your house one of these days.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: MrPickins
Very sad.

No-knock warrants shouldn't be allowed.

Knee jerk reaction, and exactly what the author of that article wants you to think.

Would you prefer the cops have to knock and wait on the porch while a drug dealer flushes his stash and loads the Uzi?

It's highly likely that the dude leaves his house from time to time. He probably doesn't even take the Uzi with him! Why not arrest him in his front yard and then search his house without risking anyone's life?

Since MrP went to no-knocks in general, that's what I'm referring to.

Your average dealer probably IS packing when they leave the house. I'd also be willing to bet that your average drug house is NEVER empty. I know if I had a large amount of drugs in my house I was selling out of, I'd never leave the stash unattended/unguarded.

That said, were I in the position to strategize for this stuff, I'd always be looking for ways to avoid injury for anyone on either side.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: MrPickins
Very sad.

No-knock warrants shouldn't be allowed.

Knee jerk reaction, and exactly what the author of that article wants you to think.

Would you prefer the cops have to knock and wait on the porch while a drug dealer flushes his stash and loads the Uzi?

Part of me wishes a Swat team mistakenly executes a no-knock search on your house one of these days.

Oh? Why? I assume you haven't been reading my responses?

I've said it's a cluster, ESPECIALLY if the guy's innocent. I've said there needs to be accountability.

Are you just upset that I won't just pick up a torch and pitchfork and blindly march to your "Cops suck!" tune?

Edit: What an asinine thing to say.

 

[QED]

What are you cop-haters worrying about? There almost certainly will be a lawsuit in which all the facts of the case will shake out, and a judge and/or jury will get to decide if Tracy Ingle was wronged or not, and if so, by whom. I, for one, am not going to base my opinion (pro or con) on no-knock warrants based on a single newspaper article with less than half of the story.

 

[skyking]

Everyone makes mistakes, but the lethal nature demands better oversight.
This case comes to mind.


I can't imagine somebody's children covered with their parent's blood from a gunshot, and think of it as an accident.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: QED
What are you cop-haters worrying about? There almost certainly will be a lawsuit in which all the facts of the case will shake out, and a judge and/or jury will get to decide if Tracy Ingle was wronged or not, and if so, by whom. I, for one, am not going to base my opinion (pro or con) on no-knock warrants based on a single newspaper article with less than half of the story.

Seriously, just hold my torch and pitchfork. Good, now, walk with me toward the courthouse. Surely by the time we arrive you'll see there's been an epic miscarriage of justice! By the time we're on the steps you'll see that you live in a police state and that all cops are really Satan, dressed in blue (or black, depending on department).

 

[upsciLLion]

Originally posted by: QED
What are you cop-haters worrying about? There almost certainly will be a lawsuit in which all the facts of the case will shake out, and a judge and/or jury will get to decide if Tracy Ingle was wronged or not, and if so, by whom. I, for one, am not going to base my opinion (pro or con) on no-knock warrants based on a single newspaper article with less than half of the story.

Do you know what the blue code of silence is?

 

[Chaotic42]

So what's your solution to these problems?

 

[Gunslinger08]

I am so tired of these stories. Can we please start making police officers personally liable for their actions and get rid of these stupid laws? Once they realize they can't do anything they want to, they might show a little more restraint. Finding a drug dealer with his pants down isn't worth people's good health or lives.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: skyking
Everyone makes mistakes, but the lethal nature demands better oversight.
This case comes to mind.


I can't imagine somebody's children covered with their parent's blood from a gunshot, and think of it as an accident.

Yeah, that's pretty fucked up.

However:

A 24-year-old informant told police that six members of his family plotted the Loomis truck robbery of the Lynnwood Fred Meyer store on Feb. 19, 1991. One guard was killed and another wounded, and the robbers escaped with $34,000.

That dude started the whole thing. The case still looks shaky after that (and should have fallen apart, it seems), but of all the people who are culpable in the case, I'm fairly sure noone's going after him, and that sucks.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: joshsquall
I am so tired of these stories. Can we please start making police officers personally liable for their actions? Once they realize they can't do anything they want to, they might show a little more restraint. Finding a drug dealer with his pants down isn't worth people's good health or lives.

I believe the average officer in the average precinct IS accountable.

As was already discussed in this thread, I don't think the fault here lies with the officers on the SWAT team, but rather with the investigators and/or the judge responsible for the warrant.

 

[skyking]

I get all that, but the kids were known to live at that house. Why do something so dangerous wtih truly innocent lives at stake? The guy worked at a tire store for god's sake, stop by and slap the cuffs on him there.