Murder or Self-Defense if Officer Is Killed in Raid? (No-Knock Raid Thread)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ABNAK

Not to sidetrack but finding something not on the warrant SHOULD be thrown out, and I don't care what it is. The 4th Amendment mentions the word "particular" and that can be inferred as meaning specific. A warrant is not, and should not be, a fishing expedition. Yeah, I know what courts have upheld but it's bullshit. SCOTUS upheld slavery once.....did that make it right?

---

The warrant has to be specific insofar as to what is being searched for and the areas to be searched. Writing a good warrant affidavit is an art.

Additionally, if let's say you are executing a search warrant for dope and find a dead body. You really expect the courts to say 'no, pretend you didn't find it?' The smart officers stop right there (where they found the body) and go get another warrant. Just as the guy finding the illegal magazine might want to stop and try to get a warrant for things related to manufacture or possession of illegal weapons.

The danger in searching further is tainting related evidence found after the discovery of the body or the magazine.

Exceptions to the search warrant: search incident to arrest - limited to area in immediate control of the subject arrested; you can enter and search without a warrant based on exigent circumstances - hostage rescue, 911 DV hang up, etc.; and you can most likely search a vehicle w/o a warrant based on probable cause under the Carroll Doctrine; another exemption is upon consent from the person who has legal standing to consent to the search.

The 4th is probably the most litigated Amendment, while it is hard to order then, I personally believe the 4th is our most precious Amendment. Followed by 2nd and 1st. Personally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 26 Inf

The warrant has to be specific insofar as to what is being searched for and the areas to be searched. Writing a good warrant affidavit is an art.

Additionally, if let's say you are executing a search warrant for dope and find a dead body. You really expect the courts to say 'no, pretend you didn't find it?' The smart officers stop right there (where they found the body) and go get another warrant. Just as the guy finding the illegal magazine might want to stop and try to get a warrant for things related to manufacture or possession of illegal weapons.

The danger in searching further is tainting related evidence found after the discovery of the body or the magazine.

Exceptions to the search warrant: search incident to arrest - limited to area in immediate control of the subject arrested; you can enter and search without a warrant based on exigent circumstances - hostage rescue, 911 DV hang up, etc.; and you can most likely search a vehicle w/o a warrant based on probable cause under the Carroll Doctrine; another exemption is upon consent from the person who has legal standing to consent to the search.

The 4th is probably the most litigated Amendment, while it is hard to order then, I personally believe the 4th is our most precious Amendment. Followed by 2nd and 1st. Personally.

---

I'm tracking, but where is the line drawn? Capital crime evidence (the body you mention)? Drugs found during a kiddie porn raid (or vice versa)? You live in NY and a verboten, dreaded "assault weapon" is found while searching for drugs?

I'm not sure where to draw the line but it HAS to be drawn somewhere, and cops don't need to define that point. The "fruit of the forbidden tree" comes to mind, and reluctantly I say yes, throw out the body evidence. You can use it as the genesis for a murder investigation but that evidence has to be thrown out. Sorry. If it's not then fishing expeditions (like exist now with warrants) are gonna continue. Yeah, I feel that strongly about it.....:rolleyes:



ETA---after some thought I might allow exceptions for capital crimes, namely murder. NOTHING else, and I mean absolutely nothing. Of course then some homicide detective will fudge PC to say he is looking for drugs when he has no other evidence (other than a hunch) that the subject committed a murder. See, I'm already doubting my change of heart!

It is really simple if you come across something not included in the original warrant, you get on the phone tell the judge what you were doing pursuant to warrant such and such and you found X.

Judhe will issue a telephonic warrant at that time and you send a deputy to go pick up the hard copy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yoni

It is really simple if you come across something not included in the original warrant, you get on the phone tell the judge what you were doing pursuant to warrant such and such and you found X.

Judhe will issue a telephonic warrant at that time and you send a deputy to go pick up the hard copy.

---

I understand, but it still violates the spirit of the 4th Amendment. Not the practical application of it as it is used today, but the essence of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ABNAK

I understand, but it still violates the spirit of the 4th Amendment. Not the practical application of it as it is used today, but the essence of it.

---

Not really you there with a legal warrant looking for Y and you open the closet and find X. You tell the judge why your there and what you found.

I had a case when I was in patrol and we walked into apartment D9 which had it's front door open and... We find 3 yahoos with 5 keys of coke, 3 pistols, 2 AK's and a shotty. Problem was we thought we were in building 4 and it was building 3. But the judge ruled that with the front door open in the summer they had zero expectation of privacy.

Conviction

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yoni

Not really you there with a legal warrant looking for Y and you open the closet and find X. You tell the judge why your there and what you found.

I had a case when I was in patrol and we walked into apartment D9 which had it's front door open and... We find 3 yahoos with 5 keys of coke, 3 pistols, 2 AK's and a shotty. Problem was we thought we were in building 4 and it was building 3. But the judge ruled that with the front door open in the summer they had zero expectation of privacy.

Conviction

---

But, back to square 1, what if the search warren was wrong, or wrongfully executed?

What if a drug raid is planned for my neigbors, and they bust in my other neighbors house accidentally and find some "right wing terrorist" items, can they ransack the house? Why? The while thing started because they were where they aught not to be.

If my house gets busted into wrongfully, is there a compensation for having my rights violated?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eurodriver

Dozer Destruction definitely happens in the USA. Dude had already killed a PD and wounded a USMS dude. Ain't got time for that.

---

Don't forget the Chris Dorner case where burners / pyrotechnics were used to kill a barricaded suspect and the Dallas shooter who was killed by a police made IED. I mean, talk about no knock...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ABNAK

I'm tracking, but where is the line drawn? Capital crime evidence (the body you mention)? Drugs found during a kiddie porn raid (or vice versa)? You live in NY and a verboten, dreaded "assault weapon" is found while searching for drugs?

I'm not sure where to draw the line but it HAS to be drawn somewhere, and cops don't need to define that point. The "fruit of the forbidden tree" comes to mind, and reluctantly I say yes, throw out the body evidence. You can use it as the genesis for a murder investigation but that evidence has to be thrown out. Sorry. If it's not then fishing expeditions (like exist now with warrants) are gonna continue. Yeah, I feel that strongly about it.....:rolleyes:

ETA---after some thought I might allow exceptions for capital crimes, namely murder. NOTHING else, and I mean absolutely nothing. Of course then some homicide detective will fudge PC to say he is looking for drugs when he has no other evidence (other than a hunch) that the subject committed a murder. See, I'm already doubting my change of heart!

---

Before you get a warrant an affidavit has to be completed and someone has to swear to it - 'the affiant.' The judge determines if there is probable cause for a warrant to issue. After the warrant is served it has to be returned to the court with a listing of the items seized. Sure officers can lie, or exaggerate to establish probable cause, but if they want to continue to draw warrants they won't. The judge's reputation is also somewhat on the line and you do not want a pissed off judge watching your every move.

Bottom line is the vast, vast, vast majority of police officers, judges and prosecuting attorneys are honest and above board. I'm pretty comfortable with the rules of evidence as they stand.

I have to be honest, the one thing I would change is that I would require tighten up procedures to ask for consent searches to ensure that subjects knew they did not have to consent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sensei

Don't forget the Chris Dorner case where burners / pyrotechnics were used to kill a barricaded suspect and the Dallas shooter who was killed by a police made IED. I mean, talk about no knock...

---

Don't forget the 1985 Philadelphia bombing.

State helo drops a satchel charge on a tenement packed with a violent black separatist group who had created a non-permissive environment. Whoever survived the blast was burned alive except one adult woman and IIRC some kids.

To be fair they had bunkered down and were swapping shots with the police.

People may look on it harshly but it was 1985 and the gadgets today didn't exist. Plus gassing didn't work.

There are a few YT videos on it which I wont link as they are all left wing who give a lot of opinion and only show bits and pieces of the actual bombing.

Or as was discussed in another thread, the highway ambush of Bonnie and Clyde.

For every 99 pointless times a NKW or tactic was employed; there is at least one where it was unavoidable and necessary.

If one sets themselves up where they cannot be contacted or have a rapport built freely, then there is no other option.

I'll bring up one that is sure to raise hankles but I feel is food for discussion.

Waco.

I will say that I believe it was horridly mishandled but lets use that model.

Large compound. Lots of weapons. Lots of people adults and children. Etc.

Using this paradigm (not the actual event), you get some kids coming forward. Some claim sexual abuse. Parents withdraw kids from school. You find one parent who absconds and says she and her daughter were in honcho's harem. Daughter is 9 y/o. Rape kit shows she has had sex recently with an adult male.

How do you honestly go in?

Somewhat remote location, open line of sight, armed adults, lots of long range weapons.

You decide to pick up Honcho at a gas station. Honcho is alone. Honcho is expected back and has given orders to seal up tighter than a metal clam and stand to if he does not return.

They still have children and a hierarchical chain of command.

How do you rescue the children without walking into a slaughter or having a spoiler where kids are used as hostages or killed in a mass suicide?

I'm curious because no knock or not that is a tough nut to crack and somebody gonna die or get seriously injured.

You know something illegal is going on in there. The full scope you do not know. The adults may never have had as much as a traffic cite, but may still follow Honcho's orders and attack.

That model, again not the actual incident though similar, is a legit Kobayashi Maru.

You can't just ignore the well-being of the other kids once PC has been established, yet going in at 0 dark 30 may devolve into a bloodbath.

I'm taking issue with the attempted parallel between guns and no knocks. One is an individuals' right and the other is not.