"No right to resist illegal cop entry into home"
Apparently a similar post was put up and I just didnt see if before posting mine. Mod please lock.
http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_ec169697-a19e-525f-a532-81b3df229697.html
INDIANAPOLIS |
"Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.
In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry."
Just thought this would be worth bringing up....
Let em try.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." (Warning –– No longer valid in Indiana.)
I think the article is a little sensational, considering the tone of the ruling.
Link to the court decision
Link to discussion in Indiana HTF
I'll leave my in-depth thoughts to the other thread, but if you read the decision I don't think it's nearly as bad as some people are making it out to be. I don't agree with the ruling; I actually agree with one of the dissenting opinions. It does not, however, make it legal for law enforcement to enter your home whenever they want.
How high a stack of bodies is it going to take for the government to get the fucking message that they do not have free reign to violate people's rights at their whim?
This is not going to go away without a body count and those judges will have the blood of every single one of them, both police and citizen on their hands.
STUPID BASTARDS!!!!!!
Unless you've responded to one, you have no idea how difficult or dangerous responding to a domestic violence call can be. I'm inclined to give officers a great deal of latitude in assessing and dealing with the situation. As the ruling indicates, an unlawful entry to investigate or even an unlawful arrest can be quickly resolved. Any evidence will be inadmissible and if no justification for the arrest exists, the acused will be released fairly quickly. It's not too large a price to pay when you consider the greatly increased risks that LEOs would otherwise face if anyone who *thought* the arrest or entry was not lawful used that as a justification. Unfortunately there are a lot of assholes and wackos out there - and you usually end up working with one, the other, or both on a domestic disturbance call.
It may offend the ultra conservatives, but it's a fairly reasonable ruling given the circumstances as the guy was in fact clearly an asshole and had he been even slightly more reasonable none of it would have transpired. He was clearly not without fault and its not like an evil LEO kicked in the door of a totally innocent citizen in the middle of the night.
A 911 call was made by his spouse and the event was on-going then the LEO arrived. What if he had just left when the guy blocked his entry and assaulted him? Conceivably it could have escalated again with the wife being killed. Bthe same people would then be crying about the LEO being ineffective. It's a no win situation for an LEO and the LEO has to err on the side of public safety, even if an asshole's rights get slightly and temporarily trampled, in order to ensure no one gets permanently hurt, and the officer needs a reasonable degree of lattitude to be able to ensure the public is protected.
