TexasCHLforum.com

Liberty wrote:There may be real justice with the so called police officers who killed the 88 year old lady. It looks like 3 of them might be on the way to prison
Maybe just maye if we start throwing a few renegade cops in jail, they might start believing in " to protect and serve". instead of storm trooper tactics. I am willing to bet if they go to prison they won't last to long.

Not enough is known about that case, at least to me, to celebrate the burning at the stake of the officers involved. While I may not be afforded as much were I in the same position, I will assume for the time being that they are innocent until I see evidence to the contrary.

I do know the officers originally reported a crack purchase from that woman in that house. That was supposedly the justification for the warrant. The problem came when no crack or powder cocaine was found after the woman was shot. IIRC, the police also indicated they had at least one marked vehicle in front of the home at the time they serviced the warrant. They also reported that the woman fired first. Of course, with what is indicated in the article above, an indictment and indeed a conviction might be justified.

Still, I've known the media to get things completely wrong before. I knew an officer who came close to facing criminal homicide charges after a justified shooting. Many witnesses told the grand jury they saw things they couldn't have possibly seen or that just didn't happen. LULAC and the NAACP were originally all over the poor guy until it came to light that he himself was a minority...Kinda hard to argue a Latino shot another Latino because he(the victim) was a Latino. Quanell X, grandstanding as usual, complained of a cover up because it was originally reported that the suspect was unarmed and handcuffed.

Fact was, the gun was recovered at the scene. The suspect's dead body landed on it but, this was not public knowledge as it was part of the investigation. The point lurking here is that "we" rarely hear all the facts when it comes to shootings and the media often spin things for the greatest effect. Which headline will get more attention? "Police Kill Drug Dealer While Serving Warrant" or "Police Kill 92-year-old Grandmother in Shootout."

Will938 wrote:There isn't a single reason that exceeds the chance of a dead suspect when considering no knock warrents, you lose so evidence? I don't care, no evidence is worth someones life. The property damage should be a major consideration too.

That assumes the suspect is believed to be innocent until proven guilty. I have no way of knowning it's true but I grew up hearing officers joke that dead suspects have been known to clear felony cases. On the outside looking in, it seems like there's been some truth to those jokes.

HankB wrote:

G.C.Montgomery wrote: . . . I've seen HPD serve warrants with not a single marked vehicle in sight. When they've served warrants in my area, the marked units were down the street or even a couple streets over. But the vehicles in front of the offending home were completely unmarked.

This sort of thing is bothersome - if LEOs serving a warrant expect to be regarded as LEOs and treated as LEOs in lawful pursuit of their lawful duties, it is incumbent upon THEM to make THEMSELVES readily identifiable as such.

Drive marked cars, wear regular uniforms, knock on the door and present a valid warrant, and, by golly, the resident of the home BETTER comply peacefully - the T's have been crossed, the I's have been dotted, and we all have a responsibility to obey the law.

On the other hand, unmarked cars, masks, plainclothes, etc. all serve to conceal their identities, both as individuals and as LEOs - you can't tell them apart from invading imposters. IANAL, so I'm not "plugged in" to the legal system, but even I'm aware of at least a couple of cases over the years where juries refused to convict a homeowner who fired upon invading LEOs who were NOT readily identifiable as such. (Of course, if it's o'dark thirty and your first inkling that something is amiss happens when you wake to find half a dozen HK MP5SDs pointed at your head, your options are limited.)

Well, LE argues that flashing lights and marked cars gives the bad guys a clue and gives them time to conceal/destroy evidence and/or prepare a defense for their assault. So the resulting conclusion is no knock warrants, unmarked vehicles, and men in masks protects the officers and, in theory, protects the citizens and criminals. How? In theory, being hit with overwhelming force suppresses resistance so the officers don't have to escalate to deadly force. Of course there's more to it but that's a short version of the answers I've gotten while growing up with family and friends in LE.

I understand the reasoning even if I don't agree that such tactics should be used in many situations. But, what bugs me most is the attitude some officers and even whole agencies have that any property damage or non LE lives ruined/lost in pursuit of justice are justified so long as the officers get to go home to their families. I don't know what the answer is, but it seems there are some serious flaws in the way things currently work.

HankB wrote:A bunch of marked squad cars in the driveway with lights flashing would strongly suggest they were real cops...

I agree, but I've seen HPD serve warrants with not a single marked vehicle in sight. When they've served warrants in my area, the marked units were down the street or even a couple streets over. But the vehicles in front of the offending home were completely unmarked.

The lesson learned for me is that as much as possible, I need to make it impractical for someone to knock down the front door in one shot. Windows entry, unfortunately is fairly easy too so the answer becomes finding a way to buy time to identify your threat.

Ideally, I'd have trip sensors that gave audible alerts to anyone in the yard. But I'd be shooting dogs and cats every night with such a system. Instead, I have motion sensors on some exterior lights as well as static lights on normal approach angles like the front and back doors. When time and money permit, I'll add cameras but that may have to wait until we move. My exterior doors are also reinforced with steel and the longest bolts I could find around the frames and the doors themselves are steel skinned. Hopefully any entry guy will sprain his wrists on the first whack with the ram. I've also got prickly plants around all the windows to make climbing in a hassle. I really thought about bear traps behind the plants and under the windows but, there's this goofy clause in the penal code about booby traps designed or known to cause injury and death. I was hoping I could claim they were for rabbits but my lawyer says even he couldn't find a jury that dumb. After seeing Robert Durst walk for murder I thought surely he could but he still says no.

Sorry, I can't abide by that advice. Too many home invasions end with compliant dead bodies.