No knocks - Murder or Self-Defense if Officer Is Killed in Raid?

[Marine Cpl]

The argument that crime like robbery and burglery would increase if drugs were legal is a valid one if you aren't allowed to defend yourself.

If stand your ground laws were enacted and the above crimes were treated seriously and harshly, that wouldn't be the case.

Also, addicts would voluntarily lock themselves up if given an alternative like a secure prison or hospital or whatever you want to call it if they knew that they could get the drug there. It would be far cheaper to house them and give them the drug rather than employ police to fight the war.

The drug itself would keep addicts off the streets if such a program existed and would be a deterrent to those who see their friends voluntarily disappear from society.

 

[Airborneguy]

so

sounds like the defense lawyer made a good case to the grand jury about how the police failed to clearly identify themselves, and placed enough doubt on whether a no knock was even warranted. 2 good officers lost their lives for 4 oz of weed and some "cocaine residue" seems like a huge loss to me, for that reason Id argue the war on drugs is extremely relevant to this thread. The first perp, "trailer guy", didnt even have a violent history. Why not just pick him up in a neutral space?

I agree with most of what you said, look at most first post about small departments getting giddy when they get a chance to "play cop." I just don't understand how legally, when a judge signed the warrant, it was served on the correct house, and drugs were found, he still has a valid claim to self-defense? When effecting a lawful arrest, how does self-defense apply? That opens a dangerous precedent.

The manner in which this warrant was executed was reckless and unnecessary, but it wasn't illegal.

 

[spat]

I agree with most of what you said, look at most first post about small departments getting giddy when they get a chance to "play cop." I just don't understand how legally, when a judge signed the warrant, it was served on the correct house, and drugs were found, he still has a valid claim to self-defense? When effecting a lawful arrest, how does self-defense apply? That opens a dangerous precedent.

The manner in which this warrant was executed was reckless and unnecessary, but it wasn't illegal.

The man had a legitimate fear for his life, or are you suggesting we change the standard to an actual threat to his life not just a legitimate fear of one ?

 

[Marine Cpl]

I agree with most of what you said, look at most first post about small departments getting giddy when they get a chance to "play cop." I just don't understand how legally, when a judge signed the warrant, it was served on the correct house, and drugs were found, he still has a valid claim to self-defense? When effecting a lawful arrest, how does self-defense apply? That opens a dangerous precedent.

The manner in which this warrant was executed was reckless and unnecessary, but it wasn't illegal.

You should have a right to self defense if you don't know that the group breaking into your home is the police whether you have committed a crime or not.

It could easily be one of us who for argument's sake got swatted because a neighbor we had an issue with called in that we had an SBR. Whether we had that SBR or not, all we see is men in black coming in with guns pointed at the wife.

Then someone on another forum will say, "But he did have an SBR."

It's a very different situation for the person getting swatted.

All this can be avoided by intercepting the person when he leaves his house at a price of a simple surveillance followed by a warrant to search.

It's very different if life is in danger and you have to go in. But for drugs? No.

 

[Truebeliever]

All that could be avoided by making drugs legal.

Notwithstanding my point above, there are other ways to apprehend a suspect without having to bust down the front door and quote unquote "risk officer safety."

Sometimes taking the door is safer.

 

[Truebeliever]

You should have a right to self defense if you don't know that the group breaking into your home is the police whether you have committed a crime or not.

It could easily be one of us who for argument's sake got swatted because a neighbor we had an issue with called in that we had an SBR. Whether we had that SBR or not, all we see is men in black coming in with guns pointed at the wife.

Then someone on another forum will say, "But he did have an SBR."

It's a very different situation for the person getting swatted.

All this can be avoided by intercepting the person when he leaves his house at a price of a simple surveillance followed by a warrant to search.

It's very different if life is in danger and you have to go in. But for drugs? No.

It depends on what the crime being investigated or the evidence sought. Again, they flush the drugs, destroy the forensics on a firearm etc. Arrest in outside the house? How long can they sit on the house without the evidence being smoked up , sold to others, etc. So while they wait outside, he sells it to someone who OD’s. Or the six to eight cops sitting on it for days aren’t responding to emergencies.

 

[Marine Cpl]

It depends on what the crime being investigated or the evidence sought. Again, they flush the drugs, destroy the forensics on a firearm etc. Arrest in outside the house? How long can they sit on the house without the evidence being smoked up , sold to others, etc. So while they wait outside, he sells it to someone who OD’s. Or the six to eight cops sitting on it for days aren’t responding to emergencies.

Each situation warrants a different response. Many of the no knocks are pure BS however.

 

[Darth]

Self defence . The police escalated the situation to violence as they love to do and a man lost his life over 4 ounces of weed. Moreover the judge needs to be checked for signing a warrent on the word of a junkie with no other evidence? War on drugs keep up the good work. This shit need to end.

It won't. People bought in to the lie that the government told us as to why drugs are illegal. The same government that they "don't trust", they support wholeheartedly with shit like this.

 

[Airborneguy]

The man had a legitimate fear for his life, or are you suggesting we change the standard to an actual threat to his life not just a legitimate fear of one ?

But then why can't every perp argue that same case, effectively negating the police's ability to affect lawful arrests using force?

Bear with me, don't get this one get twisted because it's a legitimate question.

The facts are the warrant was valid, targeted the correct person, and resulted in the recovering the contraband listed on the warrant. I'm not saying the no-knock was the best way to go or what not. I'm saying that considering the information was correct on all accounts, and the perpetrator was apprehended with the evidence, how does he get to claim "fear of his life" during a VALID warrant execution?

What separates him from a guy I catch breaking into a car on the street, chase down, tackle, and am now fighting with, resulting in my death? What legal facts make him unable to claim self-defense but this guy can?

It's the exact same thing.

 

[Marine Cpl]

But then why can't every perp argue that same case, effectively negating the police's ability to affect lawful arrests using force?

Bear with me, don't get this one get twisted because it's a legitimate question.

The facts are the warrant was valid, targeted the correct person, and resulted in the recovering the contraband listed on the warrant. I'm not saying the no-knock was the best way to go or what not. I'm saying that considering the information was correct on all accounts, and the perpetrator was apprehended with the evidence, how does he get to claim "fear of his life" during a VALID warrant execution?

What separates him from a guy I catch breaking into a car on the street, chase down, tackle, and am now fighting with, resulting in my death? What legal facts make him unable to claim self-defense but this guy can?

It's the exact same thing.

The separation is him knowing it's the police.

 

[Airborneguy]

I guess the jury believed the perp over the cops then, if that's the only relevant factor.

 

[Darth]

But then why can't every perp argue that same case, effectively negating the police's ability to affect lawful arrests using force?

Bear with me, don't get this one get twisted because it's a legitimate question.

The facts are the warrant was valid, targeted the correct person, and resulted in the recovering the contraband listed on the warrant. I'm not saying the no-knock was the best way to go or what not. I'm saying that considering the information was correct on all accounts, and the perpetrator was apprehended with the evidence, how does he get to claim "fear of his life" during a VALID warrant execution?

What separates him from a guy I catch breaking into a car on the street, chase down, tackle, and am now fighting with, resulting in my death? What legal facts make him unable to claim self-defense but this guy can?

It's the exact same thing.

Party B claiming "but it was a valid warrant" after the fact is like party A claiming "he only WAS reaching for a cellphone/wallet" after a cop shooting.

At the time, how in the world is it relevant?

 

[Airborneguy]

It was a valid warrant from the start, and your comparison example is irrelevant, as always.

 

[Darth]

It was a valid warrant from the start, and your comparison example is irrelevant, as always.

And it was a legal object to possess.

After the fact that means nothing.

So you deflect, yet again.

 

[Airborneguy]

You win! I couldn't care less.

 

[ECU Pirates]

The article is definitely bias. Like werevit said only an ounce of coke was recovered. It doesn’t say how much was flushed down the toilet. That’s a big reason for no knock on drug dens. Unlike a gun or a knife or even counterfeit money, it is too easy to flush the evidence.

Officer safety on a no knock is also a consideration. Sometimes it’s safer so the bad guy doesn’t get a chance to set up hid ambush which they often do. They often claim they didn’t know it was the police even when the lookout runs in just before the door is hit

"When Mr. Hall had last been there, not long before his arrest, he had seen a dozen six-foot stalks ready for harvest." Not sure what kind of shitter you have, but mine is not going to flush the 6 foot plants the junkie said was there (turned out to be a whopping 4.3 ounces of weed). A cop was killed over 4.3 ounces of a plant that's now legal in many states. Play stupid games....

 

[dsdmmat]

It was a valid warrant from the start, and your comparison example is irrelevant, as always.

This is the way I look at it, you have a right to be secured in your home and the right to defend yourself at all times. If the someone kicks in your door and you are surprised you will react instinctively and defend yourself.

Doesn’t matter what they are yelling as they come through the door ( crooks have yelled police in home invasion attacks before) and it doesn’t matter if there is a valid warrant.

The reasonable man standard: any reasonable person will defend himself/ family from a perceived attack. That is why I would not see it as anything but self defense. At least the first few shots (Once the person realized it was the actual police and they stopped defending their home).

No knock warrants are very dangerous for both the officers involved and the residents inside the facility being raided. After the fiasco at Waco one would think that no knock raids would have been seen as an unacceptable risk and the practice eliminated.

 

[Podmonkey]

I agree with most of what you said, look at most first post about small departments getting giddy when they get a chance to "play cop." I just don't understand how legally, when a judge signed the warrant, it was served on the correct house, and drugs were found, he still has a valid claim to self-defense? When effecting a lawful arrest, how does self-defense apply? That opens a dangerous precedent.

The manner in which this warrant was executed was reckless and unnecessary, but it wasn't illegal.

Doesn't it anger you to think that your life may be placed at such risk for so little reason?

 

[speedkills27]

The separation is him knowing it's the police.

BOOM! this is the distinction thats being overlooked. The perp didnt know it was police, and once he did he surrendered peacefully and immediately

 

[Darth]

This is the way I look at it, you have a right to be secured in your home and the right to defend yourself at all times. If the someone kicks in your door and you are surprised you will react instinctively and defend yourself.

Doesn’t matter what they are yelling as they come through the door ( crooks have yelled police in home invasion attacks before) and it doesn’t matter if there is a valid warrant.

The reasonable man standard: any reasonable person will defend himself/ family from a perceived attack. That is why I would not see it as anything but self defense. At least the first few shots (Once the person realized it was the actual police and they stopped defending their home).

No knock warrants are very dangerous for both the officers involved and the residents inside the facility being raided. After the fiasco at Waco one would think that no knock raids would have been seen as an unacceptable risk and the practice eliminated.

Exact same scenario as I mentioned. It doesn't matter that it turned out to be a legal warrant after the fact in the same way it wouldn't matter that the object you were reaching in your waistband was a wallet.

Contrary to popular belief, the "I'm a cop, therefore I'm right. Just ask me!" ploy is often wrong.

Both scenarios involve after the fact information, but when they can't reconcile that, they just say "...totally different cases!" Sure.

Just like that cop that murdered that black man in Dallas. A few days later, now they claim "they found marijuana at his house." And the "SEE!? A REGULAR SCOFFLAW" boot lickers chime in. 0

 

[Robin]

 

[Airborneguy]

Doesn't it anger you to think that your life may be placed at such risk for so little reason?

Of course, I’ve said before that I’d never put myself in position to participate in one of these types of warrants. I do understand the legalities involved though. I just can’t see how self-defense applies here. Regardless of the perp’s prior knowledge, all of the information was correct.

 

[Podmonkey]

Of course, I’ve said before that I’d never put myself in position to participate in one of these types of warrants. I do understand the legalities involved though. I just can’t see how self-defense applies here. Regardless of the perp’s prior knowledge, all of the information was correct.

What about those instances where it actually is a "wrong door" situation? The consequences of no knock warrant raids go far beyond the bounds of this particular story.

 

[speedkills27]

Of course, I’ve said before that I’d never put myself in position to participate in one of these types of warrants. I do understand the legalities involved though. I just can’t see how self-defense applies here. Regardless of the perp’s prior knowledge, all of the information was correct.

Just because its legal doesn't make it right, and obviously the jury agreed

 

[Airborneguy]

What about those instances where it actually is a "wrong door" situation? The consequences of no knock warrant raids go far beyond the bounds of this particular story.

I've stuck to this topic specifically. You know how out of hand these conversations get, let's just stay with this one. All I'll say is that obviously if I am not comfortable participating in these situations AT ALL, it's because I'm wary of mistakes.

 

[ECU Pirates]

Of course, I’ve said before that I’d never put myself in position to participate in one of these types of warrants. I do understand the legalities involved though. I just can’t see how self-defense applies here. Regardless of the perp’s prior knowledge, all of the information was correct.

I would do the same "we are kicking the door in of a know armed man for some plants". Ummm who is "we", I'm not taking part in that stupidity. I do see how it was self defense though.

 

[Podmonkey]

I've stuck to this topic specifically. You know how out of hand these conversations get, let's just stay with this one. All I'll say is that obviously if I am not comfortable participating in these situations AT ALL, it's because I'm wary of mistakes.

The mistakes of your superiors, correct?

 

[Truebeliever]

"When Mr. Hall had last been there, not long before his arrest, he had seen a dozen six-foot stalks ready for harvest." Not sure what kind of shitter you have, but mine is not going to flush the 6 foot plants the junkie said was there (turned out to be a whopping 4.3 ounces of weed). A cop was killed over 4.3 ounces of a plant that's now legal in many states. Play stupid games....

Nope, I was talking warrants in general.

Destruction of evidence is a big worry because it’s common. Including stupid things like setting it on fire to get rid of it. Yes, I know the charge of arson is possible but they aren’t always thinking that far ahead.

Also a no knock where weapons are present is often officer safety. They are taken by surprise. And sometimes it’s safer for the occupants. What? How could that be. They occasionally take hostages including their own family members like pick up a child to use as shield.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Nope, I was talking warrants in general.

Destruction of evidence is a big worry because it’s common. Including stupid things like setting it on fire to get rid of it. Yes, I know the charge of arson is possible but they aren’t always thinking that far ahead.

Also a no knock where weapons are present is often officer safety. They are taken by surprise. And sometimes it’s safer for the occupants. What? How could that be. They occasionally take hostages including their own family members like pick up a child to use as shield.

You are quoting extreme, rare cases. In any case, like said above, no lives are worth a plant or white powder. The war on drugs is the biggest failure right behind the war on alcohol. And back then some cop probably thought he was doing good when he stormed into a building killed 3 and lost 1 for booze.