No drugs found in raid that claimed the life of Texas police officer - The Washington Post

I haven't read a ton, ton about this one, but it's in the news in Texas right now pretty heavy.

 

No knock warrant executed late at night, only thing really incriminating found in the home was a glass pipe (didn't say if it was weed, crack, meth or whatever... but what it wasn't was the pounds of cocaine that an informant alleged was there).

 

Homeowner's defense will be he thought he was being robbed.

Why this is older and in the news now: one of the officers who was shot recently died, leading to the charges being upgraded and a stronger push for the death penalty.

May not be a popular opinion, but I think that someone who is getting a huge pass in the media for all of this is the person who was the informant that led to a raid that left that kind of carnage but turned up nothing.

 

I understand the role of informants, but let's be real, plenty of them have been caught doing something and are willing to lie or exaggerate if it's a way to help themselves out.

Most informants are pieces of crap themselves, unfortunately you have to use those people sometimes to get information needed.

While I support Law Enforcement's use of "No Knock Warrants" they should not be considered likely and should only be used in dire situations, IMO.

 

But there are times that they do need to be used, so IMO they should not be "Out-Lawed" as many have advocated.

While I support Law Enforcement's use of "No Knock Warrants" they should not be considered likely and should only be used in dire situations, IMO.

 

But there are times that they do need to be used, so IMO they should not be "Out-Lawed" as many have advocated.

 

I definitely don't think they should be outlawed.

 

I can see in this case where a guy who owned a home in a rougher part of Texas saw someone coming through his window at night and shot him and understand the thought process in his head.

While I support Law Enforcement's use of "No Knock Warrants" they should not be considered likely and should only be used in dire situations, IMO.

 

But there are times that they do need to be used, so IMO they should not be "Out-Lawed" as many have advocated.

 

I don't recall anyone saying that they wanted them outlawed. I do recall a lot of people having a problem with using them to serve warrants when for non-violent offenses and in minor drug cases to prevent the destruction of evidence. Too big a risk for people to get hurt. It is usually the people in the house, in this case it was a police officer.

 

Think about it. There have been numerous instances of no knock warrants being executed at the wrong house or apartment. I usually have a gun within easy reach at my house. If they kicked in my door I'd probably reach for it before I had a chance to figure out who they were. Especially since I'm not involved in any activities that should require a warrant. If they made a mistake and came to my house instead of a neighbors I could easily get shot or shoot one of them and then get shot.

 

That brings up another question. If the police use a no knock technique to serve a warrant and the suspect shoots a police officer before they identify themselves should they be charged? It would seem that they would be defending themselves and their house from a perceived threat. It would probably be a moot point because I'm sure the rest of the officers would immediately shoot the suspect after they had fired on officers but hypothetically should they be charged?

I don't recall anyone saying that they wanted them outlawed. I do recall a lot of people having a problem with using them to serve warrants when for non-violent offenses and in minor drug cases to prevent the destruction of evidence. Too big a risk for people to get hurt. It is usually the people in the house, in this case it was a police officer.

 

Think about it. There have been numerous instances of no knock warrants being executed at the wrong house or apartment. I usually have a gun within easy reach at my house. If they kicked in my door I'd probably reach for it before I had a chance to figure out who they were. Especially since I'm not involved in any activities that should require a warrant. If they made a mistake and came to my house instead of a neighbors I could easily get shot or shoot one of them and then get shot.

 

That brings up another question. If the police use a no knock technique to serve a warrant and the suspect shoots a police officer before they identify themselves should they be charged? It would seem that they would be defending themselves and their house from a perceived threat. It would probably be a moot point because I'm sure the rest of the officers would immediately shoot the suspect after they had fired on officers but hypothetically should they be charged?

 

That's kinda what happened in this instance, except the police said they were announcing who they were as they were coming in. The way I read this case he shot out of a window at police officers outside of his house. Police did not shot and kill him though.

 

He is being charged, though there isn't much information to determine what the facts of the case seem to be beyond the initial reports from May which were short on substance.

 

That's kinda what happened in this instance, except the police said they were announcing who they were as they were coming in. The way I read this case he shot out of a window at police officers outside of his house. Police did not shot and kill him though.

 

He is being charged, though there isn't much information to determine what the facts of the case seem to be beyond the initial reports from May which were short on substance.

 

If true it's kind of hard to defend his actions although it wouldn't surprise me if some here tried.

Indiana (the home to more Militia Groups than most states) recently passed a law stating that home owners could shoot police officers in their home...

The Law States that...

(i) A person is justified in using reasonable force against a public servant if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary to:

(1) protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force;

(2) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful entry of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle; or

(3) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person’s possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person’s immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect.

So I guess in Indiana if you think you don't deserve a ticket and the officer is asking you to get out of your car and you refuse, so he has to pull you out...you can shoot him...and use this law as your defense.

Common Misconception by some on "No Knock Warrants" is that they are also "No Announce", like the police are slipping in the house like Ninjas.

 

Even on "No Knock" warrants the Police are announcing their presence in a very loud manner as they are coming in. In some cases they turn on sirens and blue lights to help identify to anyone unaware and looking out as to exactly who it is that is coming through the door.

I'm usually not the biggest proponent of digging into someone's past history, but I'd really like to know some of the background if I were having to make a final call on this one.

 

Say the dude was on parole for a weapons violation in the past 5 years, had a history of violent crime, etc., then it changes the calculus quite a bit from him being someone who'd never really been in trouble. That may be fair or unfair on a lot of different levels, but this is a situation where I'd want to know all kinds of details like that, statistics on home invasions in his neighborhood (to see if it might have been likely that he actually thought he was being robbed), something like that.

 

 

If nothing else and the guy is completely guilty and wanted to kill in cold blood, then as sad and horrific as that is, then one of the few positive things that could come from this going forward would be that situations like this would be to close out loopholes where someone could take that course of action then try to justify it with the "I didn't know it was police, I thought it was the bad guys" defense and get away with something so awful.

 

At the same time, that's much easier to balance when you look at an isolated case and don't really know how many times a no-knock warrant has been more effective in it's ends either.

I'm usually not the biggest proponent of digging into someone's past history, but I'd really like to know some of the background if I were having to make a final call on this one.

 

Say the dude was on parole for a weapons violation in the past 5 years, had a history of violent crime, etc., then it changes the calculus quite a bit from him being someone who'd never really been in trouble. That may be fair or unfair on a lot of different levels, but this is a situation where I'd want to know all kinds of details like that, statistics on home invasions in his neighborhood (to see if it might have been likely that he actually thought he was being robbed), something like that.

 

 

If nothing else and the guy is completely guilty and wanted to kill in cold blood, then as sad and horrific as that is, then one of the few positive things that could come from this going forward would be that situations like this would be to close out loopholes where someone could take that course of action then try to justify it with the "I didn't know it was police, I thought it was the bad guys" defense and get away with something so awful.

 

At the same time, that's much easier to balance when you look at an isolated case and don't really know how many times a no-knock warrant has been more effective in it's ends either.

 

I'm going to bet that they work far more often than they don't.

Here's another example of how tricky these raids can be. In this instance a confidential informant testified that they had bought $200 worth of marijuana from the suspect. The police conducted a no knock raid. When they kicked in his door the sleeping suspect picked up his pistol and was shot and killed by the officers. $2 worth of marijuana was recovered. Initially police stated that they had received multiple complaints from neighbors. Later, unable to produce any record of any complaints, the police cited the confidential informant. Ironically, the suspect himself had contacted police earlier about a person that had threatened to rob him. Ironically, the police suggested arming himself. That might have gotten him killed. The officers that shot him were cleared of any wrongdoing.

 

I don't dispute that the officers felt threatened but this guy had one arrest on his record for possession several years earlier. Was it necessary to use SWAT to serve this warrant? These are the kind of SWAT raids that I'm against. Too many chances for things to go wrong and someone to get hurt. Here's the link: Fatal Police Shooting In Florida Prompts Few Headlines And No Riots