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

[Sensei]

Certainly seems so. Equating being against no-knocks as holding anti-LE sentiment is one of the most ridiculous things I've read on this forum.

I'd say that we have some anti-LE sentiments when a post ends with this crap:

"I loved and respected law enforcement for many years but the longer I live the less I do."

That little gem comes from post 30.

Keep in mind we are talking about one aspect of LE that is less than 1% of all LE encounters with the public. Judging LE based on such scant data is what you call going full retard.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me about a local LE agency that currently allows its officers to conduct no-knock warrants when there is just drugs and no concern for officer safety such as know violent felon, weapons, etc. I'm not asking about 15 years ago, I want to know about right now.

[26 Inf]

I think LEOs are smart enough to know when to use no knocks and when not to. Mistakes are made in many professions and unfortunately LEOs have different stakes in the game.

Regarding the different stakes in the game, for too long tactically unsound behavior by police officers has gotten a pass. If your poor tactics and analytical skills put you in a position where you kill or injure an innocent you should be held responsible. Period, paragraph.

I'll go even further, I would apply that to some circumstances where breaching the tactical standard of care puts you or other officers into a position where deadly force has to be used. Case in point, suicidal crazy, armed with a long gun, exits house goes open air. A less-lethal operator breaks cover and closes the distance to get range for a 12gauge less-lethal shot. Crazy guy sees him, turns towards him and another officer dumps him (the crazy guy). Crazy guy may have very well ended up needing to be killed, but it wouldn't have been at that moment save the less-lethal operator breaking cover to close the distance.

No one gets drafted into being an officer, no one gets drafted onto SWAT. You are responsible for your professional performance.

[Eurodriver]

ED Trolling? On the pro side of a controversional LE tactic?

Well this certainly is a first.

[26 Inf]

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me about a local LE agency that currently allows its officers to conduct no-knock warrants when there is just drugs and no concern for officer safety such as know violent felon, weapons, etc. I'm not asking about 15 years ago, I want to know about right now.

Here you go:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/1...n_4138252.html

http://www.sltrib.com/news/2058222-1...r-utah-man-who

https://casetext.com/case/us-v-lund-4

Note on this: Radley Balko is generally hated by most cops (if they know of him) largely for this book: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...he-warrior-cop His stats and cases cited are accurate, he draws conclusions that many officers don't like.

Data show that in Utah, SWAT-style tactics are overwhelmingly used to serve drug warrants

By Radley Balko August 17, 2015

In response to several high-profile incidents during police raids — including the death of a police officer and the death of a man armed with a golf club (who was not a suspect) — the Utah legislature passed a transparency law last year that requires all of the state’s police agencies to report each time their officers force entry into a private residence and each time they deploy a SWAT or tactical team. The law is similar to one passed several years ago in Maryland. The Maryland law has since expired, so Utah is currently the only state in the country that requires this sort of transparency.

We now have the first batch of numbers from the new law. Here’s what the first report shows:


The 124 police agencies that responded reported 559 “incidents” in 2014. (Again, an incident is either a forced entry into a private residence or the deployment of a SWAT or tactical team.)

Despite the requirement that every police agency issue a report, 25 percent of the state’s police departments did not. So the 559 incidents represent only 75 percent of the state’s police agencies.
83 percent of the incidents reported were to serve search warrants for drug crimes.

Collectively, the categories of “active shooter,” “barricaded suspect,” “hostage” and “violent felony warrant” comprised just over 3 percent of the incidents.
“Suicidal subject” made up an additional 1.25 percent.

A plurality of the incidents, 38.1 percent, were no-knock raids conducted at night. Another 7.6 percent were no-knock warrants conducted during the day. So a bit less than half the incidents were no-knock raids. Additionally, 18.1 percent of the warrants were served with “knock-and-announce” raids at night. Given that these raids are often conducted late at night and involve forcing entry within seconds of knocking and announcing, for all practical purposes they’re indistinguishable from no-knock raids. All told, in nearly 65 percent of these incidents the police forced entry into a home in order to serve a search warrant, without giving the occupants the opportunity to avoid violence by letting them in peacefully. (Historically, this was the entire reason for the knock-and-announce requirement.)

These tactics are typically justified on the theory that they’re used only against the most dangerous, well-armed suspects. But of the 559 incidents, just three — or 0.5 percent — turned up any firearms at all. Only one suspect fired on the police. Another 19 brandished what the police on the scene determined to be a weapon. But even here, it’s hard to know if this was because a suspect was intentionally trying to harm the officers or if the suspect mistook them for criminal intruders.

Three non-law enforcement civilians were killed last year, and three others were injured.

These figures are consistent with what we saw in Maryland, and what we’ve seen when groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union have tried to collect similar information. Though SWAT teams and militarized tactics are usually justified by citing mass shootings, ambushes of police officers and incidents such as the 1997 North Hollywood shootout, they’re overwhelmingly used to serve warrants on people suspected of drug crimes.

And even those crimes are usually pretty low-level. The Utah law doesn’t require police agencies to report how much contraband they found or what charges resulted. But in Prince George’s County, Md., for example, police conducted more than one raid per day in 2009, more than half of which were to serve warrants for misdemeanors that the FBI calls “nonserious felonies.” Just 6 percent of the state’s SWAT deployments in 2009 were in response to an imminent threat such as a barricaded suspect, an escaped felon or an active shooter.

Maryland averaged about 4.5 SWAT raids per day when the transparency law was in effect. In Utah, it’s about 1.5, although it’s hard to say for sure given that a quarter of the state’s police agencies didn’t issue reports. Maryland’s population is about twice that of Utah, and its crime rate is substantially higher. In 2009, the average Maryland police agency conducted 43.5 raids per year. In Utah last year, the average police agency (among those that issued a report) conducted just 4.5.

An ACLU report issued last year analyzed 800 SWAT deployments by 20 police departments around the country from 2011-2012. That report found that just 7 percent of those deployments were in response to imminent threats. About 80 percent were to serve search warrants, and about 60 percent were to serve warrants for drugs. In 36 percent of the raids, the police found no contraband at all. Another study of Massachusetts SWAT teams released last month found that of the 21 times they were deployed to serve a drug warrant, they found illegal drugs just five times.

The good news in Utah is that the state has become something of a trailblazer when it comes to police reform, and more change is on the way. (The reforms there are thanks in great part to the work of Connor Boyack at the Libertas Institute.) A new law passed this year will require yet more data collection. More significantly, police agencies in Utah will also be forbidden from forcing entry into a home if they suspect no more than mere possession or personal use of an illicit drug. They’ll have to show evidence of actual distribution. It would be better if such tactics were prohibited entirely except when a suspect poses an immediate threat to others, but as far as I know, Utah is the only state in the country to bar them for mere possession or use. That’s at least a start.

[pinzgauer]

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me about a local LE agency that currently allows its officers to conduct no-knock warrants when this is just drugs and no concern for officer safety such as know violent felon, weapons, etc.

Maybe you'll get an answer, who knows.

The problematic GA cases, which are pretty well documented, all have at their heart snitches purporting drug crimes with minimal if any investigation work. And absolutely zero evidence to support concerns about armed felons.

In the Cornelia case the officer alluded to weapons being present, but had no proof or evidence to support it or the alleged drug sales. It was a drug case at its heart.

The Hooks case in Dublin is less clear, but again it was a snitch based drug accusations against a local businessman with no criminal record and who in fact, held security clearances, did work on military bases, etc. I've not read the warrant for that one yet.

Katherine Johnson was bad info/wrong address by a very aggressive "red dog" unit. Ultimately they were found guilty of planting evidence and disbanded

The issue is that with or without "officer safety" justification, the bar is very low to substantiate those claims. If practiced at all.

Again, assistant clerk magistrates can sign off on these things.

Entering the den of felons known to be armed? No knock makes perfect sense.

Snitch says "I know a guy dealing drugs" and 2 hours later with no further investigation a NK warrant is executed in the middle of the night on a citizen with no previous record?

That's a problem. And against the intent of the original exclusion jurisprudence.

Would you let 1st year nurses approve risky surgical procedures based on a 15 minute review? That's about what allowing assistant clerk-magistrate approve no-knocks is like.

And remember, exigent circumstances bypass the need for warrants already.

There needs to be a balance. Maybe some states/agencies have that balance. Clearly some are having issues finding it.

When bypassing the 4th amendment should there be some "first, do no harm" consideration to balance safety of bystanders with officer safety? And a high bar as originally intended to justify usage? (Read the original rulings to see how far it's drifted)

[wildcard600]

I'd say that we have some anti-LE sentiments when a post ends with this crap:



That little gem comes from post 30.

Keep in mind we are talking about one aspect of LE that is less than 1% of all LE encounters with the public. Judging LE based on such scant data is what you call going full retard.

Sorry, missed that little "gem". My statement was directed at his responses to Dist. Expert 26 and Moose Knuckle, (the latter IIRC works in LE). Making a remark criticizing a tactic that has been shown to have been used under questionable circumstances in the past is a far cry from passing judgement on LE. I also don't agree with how many instances of civil asset forfeiture have been handled, but that doesn't mean I am "anti-cop".

[Sensei]

ED Trolling? On the pro side of a controversional LE tactic?

Well this certainly is a first.

How many people in this thread have any first hand experience with the receiving end of this issue? Has anyone had the cops come through their door at night? Any family members been proned at 0500 hours? Any friends suffered this indignity?

I'm still trying to get a handle on the scope of this problem.

[Eurodriver]

How many people in this thread have any first hand experience with the receiving end of this issue? Has anyone had the cops come through their door at night? Any family members been proned at 0500 hours? Any friends suffered this indignity?

I'm still trying to get a handle on the scope of this problem.

As stated, Florida is essentially a no-knock free state so experiences among both the drug dealing population and LE with NKs are nill

[26 Inf]

How many people in this thread have any first hand experience with the receiving end of this issue? Has anyone had the cops come through their door at night? Any family members been proned at 0500 hours? Any friends suffered this indignity?

I'm still trying to get a handle on the scope of this problem.

Two posts up, just one state's problem.

[Campbell]

Certainly seems so. Equating being against no-knocks as holding anti-LE sentiment is one of the most ridiculous things I've read on this forum.

^^^ This, I will give him the benefit of calling him the devils advocate instead of a troll...
I am pro LE and prove it with my wallet...but this is a no brainer, it shouldn't be happening anywhere in the CONUS.