Another No-Knock Warrant "Success" Story

[QED]

Originally posted by: 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?

I think you're referring to the "Blue Wall of Silence"... but yes, I know what it is. I know it was common in the past, and it still pops up every now and then.

I say let the guy find a good attorney, and if everything happened as this article would make you believe, then everything will be revealed at a civil trial. The great thing and bad thing about being a cop is all of the paperwork that comes with the job-- and in this case, there should be plenty of paperwork (the warrant, the sworn statements, the arrest report, etc) to expose any possible misdeeds.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: 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.

Yeah, I think all other choices should be exhausted before taking a chance with kids around.

The man might have been innocent as in he wasn't plotting anything, but kids are innocent innocent at that age.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: 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.

Then what good would all that money spent on guns and armor do? Gotta make use of it or budget cuts will come around.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: 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.

Then what good would all that money spent on guns and armor do? Gotta make use of it or budget cuts will come around.

They could still roll up on the tire store and assault that. C'mon, be creative.

Oh, and :laugh::laugh::laugh: at your sig.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: 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.

Then what good would all that money spent on guns and armor do? Gotta make use of it or budget cuts will come around.

I don't know how it works everywhere, but my friend's husband is a cop and he had to buy his own armor and sidearm. Apparently he was issued a sidearm by the police department, but it wasn't powerful enough.

Honestly, I'm generally against tax increases but I wouldn't mind paying a little extra so that cops can have proper equipment.

 

[skyking]

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: 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.

Then what good would all that money spent on guns and armor do? Gotta make use of it or budget cuts will come around.

They could still roll up on the tire store and assault that. C'mon, be creative.

Oh, and :laugh::laugh::laugh: at your sig.

The sig is beyond quoteworthy

Assaulting the tire store:
"Our rubber bullets have no effect! THEY HAVE RUBBER ARMOR!!!!!!!!"
"Calling for backup"

 

[Fingolfin269]

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.

I believe we had another no-knock gone wrong thread last week too. Is surveillance only used in the movies? This is a serious question.

 

[jagec]

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.

From a "common sense" point of view, yes, if you hang out with thugs the cops will treat you as such.

From a "Lawful Good" point of view, this was a pretty crappy situation for the guy.

Here's an idea: If SWAT teams are so expensive already, why not kit them out with the sort of IR imaging systems which would allow them to determine if they were dealing with one guy sleeping in a bed or an alert group of armed thugs BEFORE breaking down the doors?

Yes, I know it would be expensive. So are lawsuits.

 

[QueBert]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

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.

I believe we had another no-knock gone wrong thread last week too. Is surveillance only used in the movies? This is a serious question.

why use surveillance? It's easier to shoot on sight and ask questions later. Cops don't use surveillance, and if they had asked anyone about this dude it should have been very obvious he possessed no risk at all. Yes he's broken the law but he's not a gun wielding psychopath. Wouldn't those be the only type where a no knock warrant would be logical?

to Jagac - when I lived in the projects the cops were as bad as any thug, if not worse. So by your logic if I hung with cops I should be treated like I hung with thugs

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

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.

I believe we had another no-knock gone wrong thread last week too. Is surveillance only used in the movies? This is a serious question.

yeah a warrent was issued on a repairman smelling chemicals in the house.

 

[upsciLLion]

Originally posted by: jagec
Yes, I know it would be expensive. So are lawsuits.

Haha, not when you're the police and you can avoid 99% of them.

 

[preslove]

Originally posted by: QED

Originally posted by: 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?

I think you're referring to the "Blue Wall of Silence"... but yes, I know what it is. I know it was common in the past, and it still pops up every now and then.

I say let the guy find a good attorney, and if everything happened as this article would make you believe, then everything will be revealed at a civil trial. The great thing and bad thing about being a cop is all of the paperwork that comes with the job-- and in this case, there should be plenty of paperwork (the warrant, the sworn statements, the arrest report, etc) to expose any possible misdeeds.

:roll: . It must be nice to live in your fantasy world.

 

[MrPickins]

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 not my knees that are jerking.

I've actually put quite a bit of though into it, and I feel that the ends do not justify the means. This method opens up too many avenues for things to go wrong, and in law enforcement when things go bad, usually someone ends up dead.

 

[Agentbolt]

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.

The poster who I quoted answered your question, idiot. Pay attention to what I said. I was referencing his answers. Did you also not bother to read the other post of mine where I quoted the EIGHT other stories of no-knock searches going badly?

This particular case, in which it seems the person shot is a scumbag, is NOT the hill I'm choosing to die on. Read the other incidents, including where an 84 year old grandmother was blown away, and a cop knocked on the window of the car a suspect was sitting in, shooting him in the face. There's far more flagrant out there.

And incidentally, you keep claiming that these officers are held accountable...HOW exactly? Being held accountable would be being charged with negligent homicide. Usually what happens is that the police department blames the dead guy for daring to shoot at people breaking into his home in a moment of terror, OR if the guy's lucky enough to survive, charging him with a crime.

Do your homework before blindly claiming that when drug raids go bad, the cops are held accountable. They aren't. If they were, they might not be so blase about breaking into an innocent person's home and shooting them.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
The poster who I quoted answered your question, idiot. Pay attention to what I said. I was referencing his answers. Did you also not bother to read the other post of mine where I quoted the EIGHT other stories of no-knock searches going badly?

This particular case, in which it seems the person shot is a scumbag, is NOT the hill I'm choosing to die on. Read the other incidents, including where an 84 year old grandmother was blown away, and a cop knocked on the window of the car a suspect was sitting in, shooting him in the face. There's far more flagrant out there.

And incidentally, you keep claiming that these officers are held accountable...HOW exactly? Being held accountable would be being charged with negligent homicide. Usually what happens is that the police department blames the dead guy for daring to shoot at people breaking into his home in a moment of terror, OR if the guy's lucky enough to survive, charging him with a crime.

Do your homework before blindly claiming that when drug raids go bad, the cops are held accountable. They aren't. If they were, they might not be so blase about breaking into an innocent person's home and shooting them.

I'm not sure why you can't seem to respond to someone who has a differing opinion without namecalling, but whatever.

Yes, I saw your eight quoted examples of warrant-serves-gone-wrong. I don't have examples of warrant-serves gone RIGHT, because they don't make the news. Nobody cares when the cops do their job right, only when it's wrong. What's more, I don't think if I did, it would sway your opinion. I've made my case in previous posts, and you're not doing anything to respond to my point of view except telling me to do my homework, when all you did was quote someone else who did his.

So cheers, I think I'm done with this post.

 

[QED]

Originally posted by: preslove

Originally posted by: QED

Originally posted by: 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?

I think you're referring to the "Blue Wall of Silence"... but yes, I know what it is. I know it was common in the past, and it still pops up every now and then.

I say let the guy find a good attorney, and if everything happened as this article would make you believe, then everything will be revealed at a civil trial. The great thing and bad thing about being a cop is all of the paperwork that comes with the job-- and in this case, there should be plenty of paperwork (the warrant, the sworn statements, the arrest report, etc) to expose any possible misdeeds.

:roll: . It must be nice to live in your fantasy world.

And your suggestion is, what, exactly? Make judgements based solely on what is written in the article?

As for me, I'll take facts over hysteria.

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
The poster who I quoted answered your question, idiot. Pay attention to what I said. I was referencing his answers. Did you also not bother to read the other post of mine where I quoted the EIGHT other stories of no-knock searches going badly?

This particular case, in which it seems the person shot is a scumbag, is NOT the hill I'm choosing to die on. Read the other incidents, including where an 84 year old grandmother was blown away, and a cop knocked on the window of the car a suspect was sitting in, shooting him in the face. There's far more flagrant out there.

And incidentally, you keep claiming that these officers are held accountable...HOW exactly? Being held accountable would be being charged with negligent homicide. Usually what happens is that the police department blames the dead guy for daring to shoot at people breaking into his home in a moment of terror, OR if the guy's lucky enough to survive, charging him with a crime.

Do your homework before blindly claiming that when drug raids go bad, the cops are held accountable. They aren't. If they were, they might not be so blase about breaking into an innocent person's home and shooting them.

I'm not sure why you can't seem to respond to someone who has a differing opinion without namecalling, but whatever.

Yes, I saw your eight quoted examples of warrant-serves-gone-wrong. I don't have examples of warrant-serves gone RIGHT, because they don't make the news. Nobody cares when the cops do their job right, only when it's wrong. What's more, I don't think if I did, it would sway your opinion. I've made my case in previous posts, and you're not doing anything to respond to my point of view except telling me to do my homework, when all you did was quote someone else who did his.

So cheers, I think I'm done with this post.

The rights don't erase the wrongs. The raids that go right, the officers involved get medals/commendations/etc. The ones that go wrong, everyone involved better go down the shithole. I don't give a crap that someone's "career" goes down the drain when every time one of these screwed up raids happen so many lives are put in danger, not only officers but civilians. There should be no double standard. They're in a crappy job and well, that sucks, but thats their job.

Why should we listen to those who enforce the laws on us when the laws don't apply to them in the same way. Ignorance isn't an excuse when you're a civilian, only when you're an officer it seems.

 

[Agentbolt]

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
The poster who I quoted answered your question, idiot. Pay attention to what I said. I was referencing his answers. Did you also not bother to read the other post of mine where I quoted the EIGHT other stories of no-knock searches going badly?

This particular case, in which it seems the person shot is a scumbag, is NOT the hill I'm choosing to die on. Read the other incidents, including where an 84 year old grandmother was blown away, and a cop knocked on the window of the car a suspect was sitting in, shooting him in the face. There's far more flagrant out there.

And incidentally, you keep claiming that these officers are held accountable...HOW exactly? Being held accountable would be being charged with negligent homicide. Usually what happens is that the police department blames the dead guy for daring to shoot at people breaking into his home in a moment of terror, OR if the guy's lucky enough to survive, charging him with a crime.

Do your homework before blindly claiming that when drug raids go bad, the cops are held accountable. They aren't. If they were, they might not be so blase about breaking into an innocent person's home and shooting them.

I'm not sure why you can't seem to respond to someone who has a differing opinion without namecalling, but whatever.

Yes, I saw your eight quoted examples of warrant-serves-gone-wrong. I don't have examples of warrant-serves gone RIGHT, because they don't make the news. Nobody cares when the cops do their job right, only when it's wrong. What's more, I don't think if I did, it would sway your opinion. I've made my case in previous posts, and you're not doing anything to respond to my point of view except telling me to do my homework, when all you did was quote someone else who did his.

So cheers, I think I'm done with this post.

Way to unceremoniously exit the thread after completely and utterly failing to address any of the issues I've raised. What, do you want to give them a cookie for "only" fucking up occasionally? There's going to be screw ups, there's no way around that, my problem is that when a screw up does occur THERE IS NO ACCOUNTABILITY. Other posters have quoted examples of where there was absolutely no attempt to rectify the situation whatsoever, I've given examples, and you're conveniently ignoring them.

You've blithely said "Oh I think cops are held accountable", a statement which has been disproved several times already by examples in this thread, and instead of bothering to come up with example to back up your claim, you've instead decided to go home crying because I called you a mean name. Very impressive.

I'm not looking for perfection from our SWAT teams, or a reversal of no-knock warrants. I'm simply saying that the people serving them NEED to understand they've put themselves in a difficult position in case anything goes wrong, and when it DOES go wrong, people should be held accountable. Several examples listed here qualify as negligent homicide, but thanks the Blue Wall of Silence and the pervasive attitude of "you don't question the police", nothing comes of it.

edit: Incidentally, to disprove your other ass-backwards statement, you show me an example of an incident where an incorrectly executed no-knock warrant resulted in the injury or death of an innocent person (easy to find) AND justice was actually served, meaning a person responsible for the screw up was actually punished criminally (not so easy to find, is it?) and I'll happily accept it as an example of how justice is at least sometimes served, and use it as example when complaining about some case where it was not. I don't enjoy hating the police in general, on the contrary I'd really, really, really like to be talked out of it. I'm not looking for examples of them doing their job correctly, as that's what they get paid good money to do, I'm looking for examples of them fucking up and actually getting held accountable for it.

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: Agentbolt

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
The poster who I quoted answered your question, idiot. Pay attention to what I said. I was referencing his answers. Did you also not bother to read the other post of mine where I quoted the EIGHT other stories of no-knock searches going badly?

This particular case, in which it seems the person shot is a scumbag, is NOT the hill I'm choosing to die on. Read the other incidents, including where an 84 year old grandmother was blown away, and a cop knocked on the window of the car a suspect was sitting in, shooting him in the face. There's far more flagrant out there.

And incidentally, you keep claiming that these officers are held accountable...HOW exactly? Being held accountable would be being charged with negligent homicide. Usually what happens is that the police department blames the dead guy for daring to shoot at people breaking into his home in a moment of terror, OR if the guy's lucky enough to survive, charging him with a crime.

Do your homework before blindly claiming that when drug raids go bad, the cops are held accountable. They aren't. If they were, they might not be so blase about breaking into an innocent person's home and shooting them.

I'm not sure why you can't seem to respond to someone who has a differing opinion without namecalling, but whatever.

Yes, I saw your eight quoted examples of warrant-serves-gone-wrong. I don't have examples of warrant-serves gone RIGHT, because they don't make the news. Nobody cares when the cops do their job right, only when it's wrong. What's more, I don't think if I did, it would sway your opinion. I've made my case in previous posts, and you're not doing anything to respond to my point of view except telling me to do my homework, when all you did was quote someone else who did his.

So cheers, I think I'm done with this post.

Way to unceremoniously exit the thread after completely and utterly failing to address any of the issues I've raised. What, do you want to give them a cookie for "only" fucking up occasionally? There's going to be screw ups, there's no way around that, my problem is that when a screw up does occur THERE IS NO ACCOUNTABILITY. Other posters have quoted examples of where there was absolutely no attempt to rectify the situation whatsoever, I've given examples, and you're conveniently ignoring them.

You've blithely said "Oh I think cops are held accountable", a statement which has been disproved several times already by examples in this thread, and instead of bothering to come up with example to back up your claim, you've instead decided to go home crying because I called you a mean name. Very impressive.

I'm not looking for perfection from our SWAT teams, or a reversal of no-knock warrants. I'm simply saying that the people serving them NEED to understand they've put themselves in a difficult position in case anything goes wrong, and when it DOES go wrong, people should be held accountable. Several examples listed here qualify as negligent homicide, but thanks the Blue Wall of Silence and the pervasive attitude of "you don't question the police", nothing comes of it.

edit: Incidentally, to disprove your other ass-backwards statement, you show me an example of an incident where an incorrectly executed no-knock warrant resulted in the injury or death of an innocent person (easy to find) AND justice was actually served, meaning a person responsible for the screw up was actually punished criminally (not so easy to find, is it?) and I'll happily accept it as an example of how justice is at least sometimes served, and use it as example when complaining about some case where it was not. I don't enjoy hating the police in general, on the contrary I'd really, really, really like to be talked out of it. I'm not looking for examples of them doing their job correctly, as that's what they get paid good money to do, I'm looking for examples of them fucking up and actually getting held accountable for it.

Link to happenings in the atlanta no-knock warrant incident that killed an old lady.

Looks like they are being held accountable here in atlanta. Although in this case, the people that got the warrant screwed up majorly, whereas the OPs story had leeches of society living in it, thus I don't give two shits for them.

 

[ric1287]

where can we vote for a "I hate police, even though I have no idea about what they do, but I read alot of one-sided overblown stories and watch alot of tazer youtube videos, so I am an expert" forum.