Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: roo_ster on January 16, 2017, 04:04:44 PM
-
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170108/14383136439/court-says-tossing-flashbang-grenade-into-room-with-toddler-is-unreasonable-police-behavior.shtml
The Evansville (IN) Police Department has seen a drug bust go up in a cloud of flashbang smoke. A search warrant for drugs and weapons, based on an informant's tip, was executed perfectly… if you're the sort of person who believes it takes a dozen heavily-armed officers, a Lenco Bearcat, and two flashbangs to grab a suspect no one felt like arresting when he was outside alone taking out his trash. (via FourthAmendment.com)
The state appeals court decision [PDF] hinges on the deployment of a flashbang grenade into a room containing a toddler. Fortunately, in this case, the toddler was only frightened, rather than severely burned. But it was this tossed flashbang that ultimately undoes the PD's case. The evidence is suppressed and the conviction reversed.
Scattered throughout the opinion are some amazing depictions of the PD's SWAT team at work -- and how those officers seem to believe the violence of their entries during warrant service are somehow just the new normal.
Do read the rest of the article. I especially adore the "knock and announce" procedure.
-
A) This is the kind of precedent we need a lot more of
B) Since when is 9mo "toddler" instead of "infant?"
-
A) This is the kind of precedent we need a lot more of
B) Since when is 9mo "toddler" instead of "infant?"
When it sounds (slightly) better for the police to have abused a toddler than an infant.
-
When it sounds (slightly) better for the police to have abused a toddler than an infant.
Yep, the toddler wondered up towards the noise, instead of the infant being captive in the pack n' play.
-
Oddly, the flash bang was not my main issue with that raid. The state presented no evidence to show they thought this guy was dangerous and needed the military style raid and made no effort to pick up the guy outside the home so they could conduct it peacefully. Why not wait until everyone leaves and then show up. I am trying to figure out what the difference is between a no-knock raid and this announce and enter raid. It seems to me all it does is wake up the residents without actually allowing them to realize it is the police so they are more likely to go for a gun when they bust through the door.
When I saw they had an APC, I was wondering if they drove it into the house.
-
Speaking of the APC, that is another reason the force raid was unnecessary. If the guy refuses to allow them in, they can wait 5 minutes and ram the door with the APC. THEN do the hard entry with flash bangs. Isn't that what the APC is for?
-
Double tap - sorry
-
Do read the rest of the article. I especially adore the "knock and announce" procedure.
Yep. So-called "knock and announce" is a joke. I've been saying that for years.
In most courts, uttering the words "drugs" and "guns" is normally enough to excuse a full-on, military-style assault on someone's residence. Here, though, the court finds the officers were aggressive and careless, which is an extremely dangerous combination. Things could have gone so much worse, especially for the toddler caught in the middle of it, making any police assertions about prior due diligence and "cautious" deployment of flashbang grenades almost laughable. A deployment that occurs one second after a door is breached isn't "cautious." It's obscenely negligent.
Infant or toddler, that kid probably suffered permanent hearing damage from the flash bang.
-
Yep. So-called "knock and announce" is a joke. I've been saying that for years.
But not a funny joke. They give just enough time for the homeowner to wake up and realize something is happening, but not enough to understand it is the cops. More dangerous for everyone.
-
In light of the court's finding with regards to toddlers and grenades, I have alerted my wife, the preschool teacher. She has conferred with the administration at her school, and they are considering several policy changes.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
-
In light of the court's finding with regards to toddlers and grenades, I have alerted my wife, the preschool teacher. She has conferred with the administration at her school, and they are considering several policy changes.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
Eliminating the use of flash bangs, or instituting their use?
-
Apparently the police argued this was not a no-knock warrant. Because they gave one second to comply before knocking down the door with a battering ram.
I honestly do get why police want to do this sort of thing. It's fun. More importantly, it justifies the expense of buying a lot of very expensive toys. No justification for the budget, they don't get them in the future. Lots of people like playing SpecOps Operator, but without the risk associated with actually using said toys on actually dangerous people.
http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/year.html
In 2015, 123 officers died. Total. It's not a risk free job, it's not remotely as dangerous as logging, power lines or commercial fishing. Being a police officer isn't even in the top ten most dangerous jobs. Depending on the year, they rank somewhere between 15th to 20th on the list. Landscaping is usually more dangerous. Collecting garbage virtually always is more dangerous. You could argue that police officers have significantly higher political risks than landscapers or loggers. No chance of Johnny the Lineworker getting a nationwide 5 minute hate against him for defending himself from a downed power line. That is a real threat for police officers even when they do nothing wrong. I'll buy that.
That said, certain activites are beyond the pale. Asset forfeiture without a conviction is nothing more than straight out theft and strong arm robbery. No-knock warrants without a mountain of evidence, very very specific limited circumstances and proper justification is insane. Trying to dodge what few protections exist against dangerous no-knock warrants by giving people one second to comply is also insane.
All of these concerns pose no more danger for the police, and usually significantly less. If you roll up on a guy when he's taking out his trash, he's a lot less likely to be carrying a gun or able to take hostages. You have MORE risk of both hostile and friendly fire while pulling wannabe commando raids. The 'risk' is a small chance of suspects disposing of evidence when weighed against the risk of life against criminals, bystanders and the officers themselves.
-
Apparently the police argued this was not a no-knock warrant. Because they gave one second to comply before knocking down the door with a battering ram.
I honestly do get why police want to do this sort of thing. It's fun. More importantly, it justifies the expense of buying a lot of very expensive toys. No justification for the budget, they don't get them in the future. Lots of people like playing SpecOps Operator, but without the risk associated with actually using said toys on actually dangerous people.
http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/year.html
In 2015, 123 officers died. Total. It's not a risk free job, it's not remotely as dangerous as logging, power lines or commercial fishing. Being a police officer isn't even in the top ten most dangerous jobs. Depending on the year, they rank somewhere between 15th to 20th on the list. Landscaping is usually more dangerous. Collecting garbage virtually always is more dangerous. You could argue that police officers have significantly higher political risks than landscapers or loggers. No chance of Johnny the Lineworker getting a nationwide 5 minute hate against him for defending himself from a downed power line. That is a real threat for police officers even when they do nothing wrong. I'll buy that.
That said, certain activites are beyond the pale. Asset forfeiture without a conviction is nothing more than straight out theft and strong arm robbery. No-knock warrants without a mountain of evidence, very very specific limited circumstances and proper justification is insane. Trying to dodge what few protections exist against dangerous no-knock warrants by giving people one second to comply is also insane.
All of these concerns pose no more danger for the police, and usually significantly less. If you roll up on a guy when he's taking out his trash, he's a lot less likely to be carrying a gun or able to take hostages. You have MORE risk of both hostile and friendly fire while pulling wannabe commando raids. The 'risk' is a small chance of suspects disposing of evidence when weighed against the risk of life against criminals, bystanders and the officers themselves.
I agree with your post. The only thing I wish to highlight is that there is a moral and emotional difference between being killed in an accident, and going up against bad guys every few hours or days who would like nothing better than to end you if they could. Lots of shootings don't end in the deaths of cops, and lots of scuffles don't end in shootings, but maybe not for lack of trying on the part of the arrestee.
-
Eliminating the use of flash bangs, or instituting their use?
Ms. MillCreek, the elementary school teacher, LOL'd at this.
-
I liked this title more before I read the content.
'Cout Says Tossing a Flashbang Grenade in a Room with a Toddler is "Unreasonable"'
Who would do that? Oh, police, yes, bad police would do that.
-
I am in near-perfect agreement with RevDisks' assessment. (Reply #11, http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=53707.msg1094374#msg1094374)
I am not anti-LEO, but I am against all "Special Weapons And Tactics" operations unless there is a hostage/kidnap situation.
I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, but that would take some doing.
It seems like too often it's a case of "unbending" the rules, such that "Knock and announce" morphs into "Scratch on the door with a gloved fingernail and whisper 'Police, open up'."
And too often police weapons morph into toys.
And yes, there are some ancient legal principles where mere property can be considered "a criminal" in and of itself*, and can be "arrested," but this is another case of The Law being an ass. In and of itself. After all, can mere property hire its own lawyer?
Terry, 230RN
* Note: I read an authoritative monologue by an eminent attorney on this subject quite a while ago which laid out the principles behind this concept, but I cannot recapture it now. While the concept flies in the face of reality, it is a legal principle on which the "strong-armed robbery" to which RevDisk refers is based.
I sometimes suspect The Law is in a fifth dimension beyond Space and Time. :D
-
On the cops side, the baby was in a play pen in near the front door, not in a bed room (that doesn't stop flash bangs going through the window). I still don't see the need for the forced entry or the flash bang in the first place. The article didn't mention any evidence that they were needed.
-
Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2017 @ 4:22pm
It's always seemed to me that if it's possible for a suspect to get rid of damning evidence in a short amount of time, then their criminal enterprise isn't possibly big enough to warrant a SWAT team raid. A meth lab or a big drug house will have plenty that can't be flushed. Residue can't be cleaned that quickly. Guns won't fit in the toilet.
Cops just like to go in cowboy hero style and they don't care if they shoot your dogs or flashbang your kids.
Well said in the comments.
-
On the cops side, the baby was in a play pen in near the front door, not in a bed room (that doesn't stop flash bangs going through the window).
Really not that uncommon, especially when one or both parents work long shifts; one parent goes to sleep on the couch with the baby in the living room so the other can sleep uninterrupted.
-
In 2015, 123 officers died.
. . . and many of those died from accidents or illness:
http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/causes.html
In 2015, 41 were shot, 34 died in automobile crashes, and 22 from job-related illness.
-
Oddly, the flash bang was not my main issue with that raid. The state presented no evidence to show they thought this guy was dangerous and needed the military style raid and made no effort to pick up the guy outside the home so they could conduct it peacefully. Why not wait until everyone leaves and then show up. I am trying to figure out what the difference is between a no-knock raid and this announce and enter raid. It seems to me all it does is wake up the residents without actually allowing them to realize it is the police so they are more likely to go for a gun when they bust through the door.
When I saw they had an APC, I was wondering if they drove it into the house.
Would you believe it's about $$$$. Budget justification as well as all the fun toys and egos.
-
Would you believe it's about $$$$. Budget justification as well as all the fun toys and egos.
If they don't use the toys, the people might start wondering why the police really need an APC, for example.
-
If they don't use the toys, the people might start wondering why the police really need an APC, for example.
Because the government gave it to us for free.
-
Because the government gave it to us for free.
You forgot to put "free" in quotes.
-
Because the government gave it to us for free.
Maintenance, parts, fuel, etc are not free. Plus the risks involved with using them when not warranted.
-
Maintenance, parts, fuel, etc are not free. Plus the risks involved with using them when not warranted.
Shhhh, the sheeple aren't supposed to know about that stuff.
All they need to know is that we got this cool military vehicle for free because the Army and/or the Marines were done with it.
-
Well now I wonder why they didn't just run the APC through the house. Then they don't need to worry about entry or flash bangs.
-
Shhhh, the sheeple aren't supposed to know about that stuff.
All they need to know is that we got this cool military vehicle for free because the Army and/or the Marines were done with it.
Which should have been sold to a friendly nation or to some rich collector. But we'll ignore THAT opportunity cost, too.