User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 5:35:41 AM EDT
[#1]
Mistaken Raid Death Is Ruled A Homicide
Detroit Free Press ^ | May 28, 2003 Posted on 05/28/2003 5:06 AM PDT by Wolfie MISTAKEN RAID DEATH IS RULED A HOMICIDE NEW YORK - The death of 57-year-old Alberta Spruill, who went into cardiac arrest after a mistaken police drug raid on her Harlem apartment, was ruled a homicide Tuesday by medical examiners. An informant wrongly identified the apartment as one used by a drug dealer to stash cocaine and heroin. During the May 16 raid, officers detonated a flash grenade and handcuffed Spruill. Police Commissioner Ray Kelly transferred the commander of the precinct whose officers raided Spruill's apartment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 5:54:46 AM EDT
[#2]
it's about time.
Perhaps after a few multi million dollar lawsuits these PD's will be a little more sure of their intel before kicking in a door. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 5:57:43 AM EDT
[#3]
Police Commissioner Ray Kelly transferred the commander of the precinct whose officers raided Spruill's apartment. and here is a BIG part of the problem. He should have been fired. Not just him but the individual resposible for the raid as well should go, not just be sent to another location to do this all over again. mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:00:08 AM EDT
[#4]
Yep, I agree on both counts.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:10:02 AM EDT
[#5]
OUTSTANDING. Everybody that had a hand in planning this raid and gathering info should be charged.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:12:08 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted: Police Commissioner Ray Kelly transferred the commander of the precinct whose officers raided Spruill's apartment. and here is a BIG part of the problem. He should have been fired. Not just him but the individual resposible for the raid as well should go, not just be sent to another location to do this all over again. mike Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? I'm sure you'd be ok with a summary judgement if it involved you, right? Before you get all wound up, I'm not saying that culpability shouldn't be established and harsh action taken. But perhaps there should be a thourough accurate investigation before conclusions are drawn. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:20:57 AM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: Police Commissioner Ray Kelly transferred the commander of the precinct whose officers raided Spruill's apartment. and here is a BIG part of the problem. He should have been fired. Not just him but the individual resposible for the raid as well should go, not just be sent to another location to do this all over again. mike They're using a page from the Catholic Church's employment handbook. [rolleyes] |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:22:56 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? I dunno. Ask Alberta Spruill. And 61 yo John Adams ([url]http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/wrongman001006.html[/url]). Or Ismael Mena ([url]http://www.mapinc.org/bcmpnews/v01/n1518/a10.html?999[/url]. Or maybe Willie Heard. Or Mario Paz. Or 11 yo Alberto Sepulveda. Or Pedro Oregon Navarro. Or Ralph Garrison. Stephen Medford Shively. Or Donald Harrison. Or The Reverend Accelynne Williams. Or Manuel Ramirez. Oops, can't do that. They, and many more, all died in FUBARed raids similar to the one referred to by the original poster. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:29:30 AM EDT
[#9]
I still can't believe this shit!
A P.O.S. dirtbag junkie informant would never give you faulty information, right???[rolleyes] |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:29:32 AM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? I'm sure you'd be ok with a summary judgement if it involved you, right? We're not talking about court procedings here. We're talking responsibility. The guy in charge of the unit that fucked up takes responsibility. He should be canned. Scott |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:30:01 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Quoted: Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? I dunno. Ask Alberta Spruill. And 61 yo John Adams ([url]http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/wrongman001006.html[/url]). Or Ismael Mena ([url]http://www.mapinc.org/bcmpnews/v01/n1518/a10.html?999[/url]. Or maybe Willie Heard. Or Mario Paz. Or 11 yo Alberto Sepulveda. Or Pedro Oregon Navarro. Or Ralph Garrison. Stephen Medford Shively. Or Donald Harrison. Or The Reverend Accelynne Williams. Or Manuel Ramirez. Oops, can't do that. They, and many more, all died in FUBARed raids similar to the one referred to by the original poster. EXACTLY |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:36:11 AM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? You tell me? It's a myth that no longer exists in this world. PD's across the country have completely thrown that out the window. Apparently it only applies to the LEO community now. mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:42:17 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: Quoted: Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? I'm sure you'd be ok with a summary judgement if it involved you, right? We're not talking about court procedings here. We're talking responsibility. The guy in charge of the unit that fucked up takes responsibility. He should be canned. Scott Canned?? He should be charged with negligent homicide, convicted of negligent homicide and put in prison for negligent homicide. That's responsibility for YOUR operation. Freaking JBT's [pissed] |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:48:44 AM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: Canned?? He should be charged with negligent homicide, convicted of negligent homicide and put in prison for negligent homicide. That's responsibility for YOUR operation. Freaking JBT's [pissed] I think that the determination needs to be made as to who is culpable for the death of the woman, but I kinda doubt it's the commander. He may have known there was a raid going down, but someone else bears even more responsibility than him. Whomever it is, I agree with you, they should be punished to the full extent of the law. But I still say that canning the the commander is a good first step. Scott |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:49:37 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: Quoted: Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? I'm sure you'd be ok with a summary judgement if it involved you, right? We're not talking about court procedings here. We're talking responsibility. The guy in charge of the unit that fucked up takes responsibility. He should be canned. Scott Well, here's a question did the guy that got re-assigned have anything to actually do with the raid? Or was he the "head man" so he got decapitated? How can Ray Kelly blame the district commander for that screw up, without blaming himself? Isn't Ray the top dog at NYPD, isn't he the guy who is responsible for EVERYTHING there? Sorry I've seen investigations that are looking for scapegoats. It's all fun and games until 2-3 weeks under the microscope that the person being investiagted realizes that the incident they are getting investigated for occurred on their days off. Now, I am in WI, land of milk, cheese, and the Packers, there hey. Things are different here I as a cop can make calls on the fly that cops in NYC would need a warrant or aren't authorized to make. But if I try to get a warrant, I can't see being able to get a warrant based solely on an informant. I know I can't get a warrant based on one trash pick, but I see over and over again in the stories that are posted here other places allow warrants based on 1 trash pick. I could go on. Here's what I would want to know. Who was the informant. Was there actually an informant? What was done to corroborate the infomants info? Was all the info the detective had from the informant accurately reported by the detective? How long has the detective know the informant? Were all policies followed in recruiting and documenting the informant? Was the information presented to a Judge actually enough to satisfy the PC requirements to get a warrant? Why did ESU use a flashbang? How long did it take to get EMS on scene? Who was the senior person that knew about and approved the use of ESU? Waht info was given to them justifying the request for ESU? Mike, innocent to proven guilty applies to everyone, I wonder an awful lot about the facts that justify the issuance of search warrants in a lot of the cases that are posted on this site. Is the info as reported accurate? etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 6:55:02 AM EDT
[#16]
That scarces me a lot. We have a few of them here in So. CAlif also. The PDs don't check out the varacity of their informants carefully enough. PDs that raid the wrong house, and all they say is "oops, sorry, wrong house." And also the PDs raided the wrong apartmetn and killed some poor soul inside. A small No. CAlif city was sued and it was beyond the amount of their liability insurance.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 7:07:53 AM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: Here's what I would want to know. Who was the informant? Was there actually an informant? What was done to corroborate the infomants info? Was all the info the detective had from the informant accurately reported by the detective? How long has the detective know the informant? Were all policies followed in recruiting and documenting the informant? Was the information presented to a Judge actually enough to satisfy the PC requirements to get a warrant? Why did ESU use a flashbang? How long did it take to get EMS on scene? Who was the senior person that knew about and approved the use of ESU? Waht info was given to them justifying the request for ESU? Here! Here! I completely agree. Police Officers have to be held to this standard. There seems to be too much leeway being given to police officer in regards to search warrants. And if they screw up, there must be extreme penalties to ensure that bureaucrats feel the pain they have imposed upon the folks they are paid to protect. In my opinion that includes lawsuits that bankrupt town, cities, etc. Police officer killing the folks they are paid to protect is just plain unacceptable. You would think after a couple of hundred years, LEO organization would have this down to an art form. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 7:37:20 AM EDT
[#18]
Add to that list of "What we want to know":
Who decided to put the old woman in cuffs and why?? Scott |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 7:48:20 AM EDT
[#19]
57 isn't exactly old.
Also if by asking that you are saying that women are less, willing or capable of being problematic you are wrong. Plus I would be the protocol is clear-cuff-clear-cuff, etc. until you run out of people and/or space. Nothing would be worse than finding a person, then passing by to clear more areas, and have the person you just passed arm themselves, or jump in when you are trying to secure the next person. I think the accountability tree starts detective DA Judge Informant and goes from there. Then again NYS doesn't require Judges to be lawyers [rolleyes] |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 7:51:43 AM EDT
[#20]
I got to go along with my fellow cheesehead here. there is too much that still needs to be answered, including what will happen to the informent. He started the ball rolling with info that turned out to be bad. Granted it is the duty of the police to check that info and make sure it is good info in the end. But there can be no action taken against anyone involved unless there is action taken against the person who provided the original faulty info. Afterall had the informent not oppened his mouth this would not be an issue in the first place
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 7:53:25 AM EDT
[#21]
And Oly comes out in full support of the great Blue Wall!! Where's Five-0 and the rest of the gang?
Excuse me while I have a quiet memorial for this poor fallen citizen. She should have called 911 at the first sound of noise[rolleyes] [USA] |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 7:54:01 AM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: 57 isn't exactly old. Ooops. I was thinking "67." |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 7:57:57 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: And Oly comes out in full support of the great Blue Wall!! Where's Five-0 and the rest of the gang? Excuse me while I have a quiet memorial for this poor fallen citizen. She should have called 911 at the first sound of noise[rolleyes] [USA] Which part? where I say: Before you get all wound up, I'm not saying that culpability shouldn't be established and harsh action taken. But perhaps there should be a thourough accurate investigation before conclusions are drawn. Well I guess that was wishy washy. Again I have questions on how/why a warrant could/or would be issued on the apparently uncorroborated say so of an "informant". I guess you didn't read any of that Sgtar15, hate blinds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 8:06:55 AM EDT
[#24]
anyone know what kind of charges the cop who accidently shot that guy in the face with the AR got?
is he still working? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 8:12:09 AM EDT
[#25]
I read it Oly. You sated "innocent till proven guilty"; I am sure you believe that every time you pull over a teenage black man huh??
You talked about the need for an investigation; I assume you meen an [i]internal[/i] investigation right? And the most glaring facts is you ignored that a woman died, instead you immediately started defending the officers. Yes, you have questions...but no of them are about the dead victom!! Blue corrupts Oly Sgtar15 |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 8:15:42 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: I think the accountability tree starts detective DA Judge Informant and goes from there. I noticed nowhere did you list how the actuall LEO's should be held accountable here. Why is that Oly? Are [b]you[/b] a Detective, DA, Judge, or informant? Or are you a regular Leo? Sgtar15 |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 8:43:08 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: anyone know what kind of charges the cop who accidently shot that guy in the face with the AR got? is he still working? If you mean the 7-11 FBI case of mistaken identity, I'm fairly sure that he shot the boy on purpose. Anyway, what did he have to lose whether it was on purpose or another case of an officer's gun "going off"? Ever been slapped on the wrist? It doesn't hurt all that much. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 9:02:40 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: I read it Oly. You sated "innocent till proven guilty"; I am sure you believe that every time you pull over a teenage black man huh?? Yes, excuse me for believing in those sill old fashioned ideals that are embodied in the Constitution You talked about the need for an investigation; I assume you meen an [i]internal[/i] investigation right? You do realize tha in an internal investigation, that is used for discipline, that police officers DO NOT have the Right to remain silent. Totally independent of that should be a thorough professional criminal investigation, perhaps more than one agnecy, ie Coroner, DA, etc. involved in that. And the most glaring facts is you ignored that a woman died, instead you immediately started defending the officers. Yes, I must have been defending the officers when I asked how does anyone get a warrant based merely on an "informants" say so. That is more than a problem with AN officer. That seems to suggest a systemic problem. Yes, you have questions...but no of them are about the dead victom!! The victim, is dead, she did nothing wrong. But running around screaming with our hands over our heads, like scared girl scouts, doesn't address the problem or determine who was at fault. I prefer to have facts, evidence, and information, as opposed to jumping to conclusions. Blue corrupts Oly Sgtar15 |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 9:14:25 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: Quoted: I think the accountability tree starts detective DA Judge Informant and goes from there. I noticed nowhere did you list how the actuall LEO's should be held accountable here. Why is that Oly? Are [b]you[/b] a Detective, DA, Judge, or informant? Or are you a regular Leo? Sgtar15 As I understand this case, a drug detective got info from an informant. With that info he obtained a search warrant. The warrant was served by ESU. If that is correct no "regular" LEO's, ie street cops, patrol officers, blue boys, etc. were involved. FYI detectives think that are the low-drag, high-speed, cream of the crop of LEO's. In other words the are LEO's. Maybe not your basic uniformed LEO, thought the were once, they are now "suits", and still LEO's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 9:19:53 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: Quoted: I read it Oly. You sated "innocent till proven guilty"; I am sure you believe that every time you pull over a teenage black man huh?? Yes, excuse me for believing in those sill old fashioned ideals that are embodied in the Constitution You talked about the need for an investigation; I assume you meen an [i]internal[/i] investigation right? You do realize tha in an internal investigation, that is used for discipline, that police officers DO NOT have the Right to remain silent. what happens if they refuse to speak? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 9:25:10 AM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: what happens if they refuse to speak? Any discipline, up to and including termination, that the dept. sees fit. Really easy way to get fired. Most depts. won't stand for it. Nor will anyone else who is in a position to make decisions about the termination, civil servce hearings etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 9:35:40 AM EDT
[#32]
Quoted: Quoted: what happens if they refuse to speak? Any discipline, up to and including termination, that the dept. sees fit. Really easy way to get fired. Most depts. won't stand for it. Nor will anyone else who is in a position to make decisions about the termination, civil servce hearings etc. in other words, if they refuse to tell the boss what happened, they get fired |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 9:42:02 AM EDT
[#33]
Quoted: anyone know what kind of charges the cop who accidently shot that guy in the face with the AR got? is he still working? He was totally exonerated, and is working cases again. For those who are keeping score, this was the [b][i]second[/i][/b] unarmed man he shot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 9:51:12 AM EDT
[#34]
this reminds me of article i read about the cops breaking in to the wrong house and shooting a poor guy (father of three) that was tryng to protect his family. they were sleeping and the door coming down woke him up, he went to the closet and got a shot gun to defend his wife and kids, the cops came in and seen him and blasted him, killing him in front of his wife and 6 year old son. then they jumped on his wife and cuffed her in front of the children that were now awake.
he was legal and had broken no laws, so he had no reason to beleive the guys breaking his door in at 3am and yelling police were the real police, the article ended saying that the matter was being handled internally by the police dept. isnt this like the wolves investigating the wolf that raided the chicken coop? how many of us on this board would get shot defending our house and home from a threat in the middle of the night, would you believe the guy yelling police while breaking down the front door? i would atleast arm myself and check my targets before i shot anything, but i would probably get shot also in that situation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 10:05:06 AM EDT
[#35]
Quoted: Quoted: anyone know what kind of charges the cop who accidently shot that guy in the face with the AR got? is he still working? He was totally exonerated, and is working cases again. For those who are keeping score, this was the [b][i]second[/i][/b] unarmed man he shot. imagine that ... and he had NO RIGHT to remain silent in the internal investigation |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 10:32:17 AM EDT
[#36]
Quoted: Yes, excuse me for believing in those sill old fashioned ideals that are embodied in the Constitution Funny you should say that in defense of government employees who violated how many amendments to said constitution? Amendment IV The right of the people to be [red]secure in their persons, houses,[/red] papers, and effects, against [red]unreasonable searches and seizures[/red], shall not be violated, and [red][b]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.[/b][/red] Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, [red]nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law[/red]; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. And I bet Amendments VI through VIII would be applicable as well. That's just for starters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 10:45:05 AM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: Quoted: what happens if they refuse to speak? Any discipline, up to and including termination, that the dept. sees fit. Really easy way to get fired. Most depts. won't stand for it. Nor will anyone else who is in a position to make decisions about the termination, civil servce hearings etc. So essentially, you face the same disciplinary action that any "civvy" would face on the job for fucking up? I guess the only difference would be the magnitude of the mistakes. But, most companies wouldn't simply transfer an employee who contibuted to the death of an innocent to some other department. That person would be fired without question. It looks like the "thin blue line" is a questionable border, and getting thinner by the day, isn't it Oly? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 10:51:14 AM EDT
[#38]
Quoted: Quoted: He was totally exonerated, and is working cases again. For those who are keeping score, this was the [b][i]second[/i][/b] unarmed man he shot. imagine that ... and he had NO RIGHT to remain silent in the internal investigation Uh, yeah. Color me unsurprised. The family of the guy who was shot hired a retired FBI agent to investigate the shooting, and the coworkers of the shooter kept calling him and telling him that it was a good shoot and that he was barking up the wrong tree. Special Agent Christopher R. Braga is safe from prosecution, but don't worry...the victim still has his civil remedies open to him. In other words, Braga got away clean but you and I will get to pay for his wrongdoing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 11:18:38 AM EDT
[#39]
Quoted: In other words, Braga got away clean but you and I will get to pay for his wrongdoing. And THAT is what gets everyone up in arms. Even though the law has provisions for personal accountability, it is rarly exercised, leaving you and I holding the bag. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 11:28:42 AM EDT
[#40]
If 15 guys broke into your home, and killed your wife, all of them would be charged with capital murder. Unless of course they are the police.
Everyone should be charged. Then have a trial. TXL |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 11:33:40 AM EDT
[#41]
Here is a simple term for you civilians to look up: COLLATERAL DAMAGE. Deal with it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 12:48:10 PM EDT
[#42]
Quoted: Here is a simple term for you civilians to look up: COLLATERAL DAMAGE. Deal with it. No! No! No! COLLATERAL DAMAGE is something that happens in OTHER countries. Our goverment would NEVER get accustomed to using those tactics overseas and decide to bring them back home. Never! Besides, it's OK to use those tactics overseas. The Declaration of Independence clearly states: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..." And as we ALL know, "all MEN" really means "all Americans." The Creator endowed all the [red]foreigners[/red] with "alienable" rights, as opposed to our unalienable rights.. C'mon Imbroglio, get with the program! [red]Racial slur removed. --thebeekeeper1[/red] |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 2:22:05 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted: Quoted: Police Commissioner Ray Kelly transferred the commander of the precinct whose officers raided Spruill's apartment. and here is a BIG part of the problem. He should have been fired. Not just him but the individual resposible for the raid as well should go, not just be sent to another location to do this all over again. mike Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? I'm sure you'd be ok with a summary judgement if it involved you, right? Before you get all wound up, I'm not saying that culpability shouldn't be established and harsh action taken. But perhaps there should be a thourough accurate investigation before conclusions are drawn. Because they are cops, and need to be held to a higher standard than civilians. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 2:42:59 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted: Because they are cops, and need to be held to a higher standard than civilians. Cops are civilians. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 2:51:57 PM EDT
[#45]
This seems to be a big whup-dee fuck.
A tragic mistake that happens in the real world, and nothing more than a slab of plywood propping up the soapbox of those who are looking for ANY reason to bash cops. The got bad info, flashbanged the place, and she went into cardiac arrest. That sucks ass. There should be a civil suit, and her family should win lots and lots of money. The guy who got the bullshit information should be put on a slow boat to China, never to work as a cop again. But people saying he should be charged with homicide for this? No way. Imagine you were told to meet your friend at his house, 123 West Ave. You get in your car, go there, and walk through the door front door. "Hello? Is anyone home?" The next thing, a woman comes out half naked screaming. You realize you went to 123 West St. instead of Ave. Should you be charged as a peeping-tom, or for burglary? Of course not. The same logic applies. Though the outcome was far more severe, negligence is a different thing than criminality. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 2:58:57 PM EDT
[#46]
You might want to check out the video "When COPS Attack." I believe that's the name. I rented it several years ago at Blockbuster. It includes dozens of videos showing police brutality, screwed up raids, etc...
My favorite, is one scene where the cops are getting ready to raid a house and gunfire breaks out. The cops are firing wildly into the house...The news people are saying the suspects are shooting it out with the cops, etc...Turned out...noone was home. Hate to think what would have happened if there had been a family home at the time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 3:04:05 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted: Imagine you were told to meet your friend at his house, 123 West Ave. You get in your car, go there, and walk through the door front door. "Hello? Is anyone home?" The next thing, a woman comes out half naked screaming. You realize you went to 123 West St. instead of Ave. Should you be charged as a peeping-tom, or for burglary? Of course not. Imagine a frog with hair, catching a truck. Should Tuesday be beer? Sounds nuts, and totally non sequitur? So does your example. It's bullshit and doesn't have anything to do with the case at hand, nor with the real world. Besides, who in his right mind would just /walk/ into a house, when he's been told to wait /at/ it? The same logic applies. No, it doesn't. If only for the complete lack of logic. negligence is a different thing than criminality. Courts seem to differ on that opinion. In fact, there's even a legal term called "criminal negligence". |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 3:04:59 PM EDT
[#48]
I read on another board that she went into cardiac arrest [b]two hours[/b] after the raid.
BTW; They didnt raid the wrong house. They went to the right house. A judge thought the informants information was reliable enough to issue a warrant. Time will tell if the informant was blowing smoke or if the cops just had bad timing and hit the house while inventory was low. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 3:19:36 PM EDT
[#49]
I would be one of those who gets shot, because this is how I would meet any 3 AM intruder:
[img]http://www.cs.uwf.edu/~ccarr/night.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.cs.uwf.edu/~ccarr/newpics/ak002.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.cs.uwf.edu/~ccarr/newpics/shotgun2.jpg[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2003 3:19:38 PM EDT
[#50]
Quoted: I read on another board that she went into cardiac arrest [b]two hours[/b] after the raid. BTW; They didnt raid the wrong house. They went to the right house. A judge thought the informants information was reliable enough to issue a warrant. Time will tell if the informant was blowing smoke or if the cops just had bad timing and hit the house while inventory was low. So, they raided the right house and just didn't find what they were looking for? They should be able to find what is listed in the warrant almost immediately, otherwise a no-knock warrant isn't really required, is it? But I'm sure, given enough time, the cops will be able to come up with "something" at the location to justify their actions. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
