http://abcnews.go.com/US/tucson-swa...ine-veteran/story?id=13640112&page=2

Always two sides to a story but they shot the guy 60 times.

I didn't see anything about the police identifying themselves in there........ what's swats procedure on that?

as so many times not enough actual facts to make a determination


but some facts remain clear


a man that served his country honorably is dead

there's a widow and two orphans left behind

police are responsible for his death

medical attention was delayed, though you have to wonder how medics are gonna save a guy shot 60 times


hope to God he was a guy involved with drug trafficking as the warrant suggested


otherwise how do the SWAT guys live with themselves if this was just a tragic mistake?


even more troubling, what if it was a mistake and they are able to clear their conscience by "hey it was just bad intel, the guy should have dropped to the ground"

how many of us with our doors being broken down would our first instinct be to protect our family?

even if it's the last instinct you'll ever have

This story really stinks.

I guess we just need to sit back, and let the cops kill us at their convenience, and never question what they do.

No wonder there are so many cop 'haters' out there, there is so much to distrust.

Here's a quote from the article -

In a statement, the sheriff's office criticized the media, saying that while questions will inevitably be raised, "It is unacceptable and irresponsible to couch those questions with implications of secrecy and a coverup, not to mention questioning the legality of actions that could not have been taken without the approval of an impartial judge."

Hey, sheriff, go [bleep] yourself. Raising questions is what the media is supposed to do, especially when the police are not forthcoming with answers and lie about this poor guy shooting first.

As for the impartial judge, he or she can only base a decision on information supplied by the police. I would love to see what that was.

Man, I am sick of these SWAT drug raids. I hate drugs and drug dealers but this kind of law enforcement has got to stop.

I don't think he was SHOT 60 times, but more likely than not, shot AT 60+ times.

Not that it matters.

�Government is not reason. It is not eloquence. Government is force; like fire it is a dangerous servant -- and a fearful master.� - Look it up

Initial reports said they did yell who they were. However it was also intitially stated that he shot first.
New details say the AR15 was on safety.
Also noted the SWAT said he yelled something to them which his wife which was hiding in the closet said was not true.
Too many details left out and not a lot of noise from the County. I think they goofed and they know it so they are doing all they can to find some sort of legality to it.

Either way sad situation for the wife and child that were home and heard the shots and seen the Marine flopped on the table gasping for air. Its a shame they delayed medical aid and I think thats a whole different law suit.

be interesting to see what the investigation shows. So until then I'll say its a sad situation regardless of what happens. If he was mixed up in home invasions and Drug trafficing, its sad a former marine would be doing that. If he was not involved in all that stuff, then it is sad the county dropped the ball and wrongfully killed a man.

Kique

Rasmacker,

He was shot at 71 times and hit 60 times.

No [bleep]. Lot's of cops enjoy enforcing laws infringing on personal liberties, and that's why there's a general distrust and dislike of the government and those who choose to be it's enforcers.

I'll reserve judgement until everything comes out but it's hard for me to believe a guy working two jobs and 12-14 hours a day is a drug dealer.

And they shot Bin Laden only 2 times what the F**** I want my money back>

Where TF is Sheriff Dupnik, and his "Outrage" about "Dialogue"?

Oh,....." No Comment"

GTC

Stand down, Brother. Semper Fi.

All other comments withheld....

If a guy deserves 1 bullet he deserves 60. I don't care how many times they shot him if he had it coming.

But loosing 70+ rounds in a house with a woman and child inside?

something stinks here..........

Just sayin you go easy with the most wanted man of ten years and you turn a taxpayer into hamburger WTF grab a brain man.

I would say that has alot to do with the men on the triggers and their training.

or the lack thereof.......

Prexactly.

I'll wait for more info but for now this stinks.

This really don't pass the smell test on what is available. It also seems like the team went out of control, that is a hell of a lot of expended rounds for one man IMHO.

I really would like to know the whole story on this one. Until then I will reserve judgment. But I will state that I think the over militarization of the police in general and the freedom of no knock warrants is wrong. They should be reserved for the most serious of cases and require much verification prior to issue IMHO.

Knockiing on the right door may be a starting point.

Because that would make it right? Not in my world.

Warrantless searches seem to be gaining alarming momentum

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...s-house-to-house-searches-are-okay.shtml

Disgusting all around. I can easily see how a seemingly non-stop series of these kinds of stories can turn what was once inherent respect into a deep hatred, especially when many were far from being in love to begin with.

A fella here (as in on the 'fire) recently made a comment about realizing that we live as "free range chickens".

He's right...

exactly
if he was hit 60 times, they shot about 200 at him
and he's look like ground meat

Covers my thoughts.

All I know is that the 4th Amendment was violated by the police. But hell who needs the 4th Amendment. I thought the Federal government was suppose to protect us from the evil State government.

Damn I hate government.

Foxbat;

Safe play having T do so. I think I'll follow suit.

DITTOS!!!!!

If cops are not already engaged with an armed and violent criminal, it needs to be illegal to call in a dynamic entry team. This is not how we're supposed to live in the United States.

Shot AT for 71 rounds and hit 60?? Just out of curiousity, does Tucson require college degree of some sort for recruits??? Something VERY wrong here. That is PANIC shooting. Uncontrolled fear does that. What kind of scuz have they been hiring?? This should result in criminal action.

'Subjects' in IN have no Fourth Amendment any more..

And it's comin' to a city/state near you...

You're like two different people, Sam. Sometimes you're dead right (like now) and sometimes you couldn't be more wrong if you tried. Are you by any chance a multiple personality?

Damned right!!

George Washington.

They generally don't look like the Avon lady..

Naw... F'k playing it smart...

Look, that Marine put his life on the line for the rest of us, including that "team".

If he was a drug smuggler, then he disgraced us all, and had it coming.

If not...

He was the best of us; defended us; sacrificed for us... And was slaughtered in front of his wife and kid by over-zealous and erroneous cops with an ego trip and the authority to do as they pleased.

If the latter is true....

Reassign them all (up the entire chain of command) to Afghanistan and Iraqi; front-line units, on point...every day, for the rest those conflicts.

Award his family their civilian salaries and pensions, and have them all start at E-1 and try to earn anything back.

Maybe, just maybe the police heard the toilet flushing.

BP...

Those sorts of mistakes are inevitable, which is why such raids need outlawing yesterday. SWAT was designed to respond to an already hot situation, not meant to issue search warrants. That has to stop. It's a surefire formula for tyranny. Search warrants need to be issued in a non-violent manner in order to serve their intended function, which is to allow the home owner to understand that a court has properly authorized the search so that he knows not to resist with violence.

Remember, any forced entry into a home in a free society is presumed to be done by those who mean to criminally harm you, and therefore violent resistance, in a free society, is the norm. The purpose of the warrant is to demonstrate that no violent resistance is needed, because the people seeking entry are acting on extra-ordinary legal authority from the courts. So cops need to knock, wait for an answer like a normal person (not dressed like soldiers), and show the home-owner the legal proof of their authority to enter, giving him time to verify its validity and cooperate with the lawful order. No exceptions. All errors must be made on the side of the rights of the individual, not the convenience or safety of the police (if you don't want a dangerous job, do something else), or for the ultimate success of the prosecutors.

Police today are trained to go home safe after their shift no matter what it takes to do that. Unfortunately, to many police shoot first and ask questions later.

Yep.

I remember when the TV show "SWAT" first came out. The TV ad said, "When the you are in trouble you call the police. When the police are in trouble they call SWAT." Unfortunately, that's not the story today.

Right. That's the only possible justification for a special militarized police unit, and even that's pushing it in a free society. They've gone completely overboard. That's the nature of slippery slopes, though. For that reason, you have to stay far clear of them to avoid the fall all the way down.

With only Ginsberg to fight against them, not much chance of anything improving soon.

When/if the IN decision goes national, so too goes any deference to a badge or uniform.

+1

Wow, I guess I'm in the minority here: I would at least remain neutral on this one until all the facts come out, last time I checked the police are not the enemy, they are putting their butts on the line to protect us, just like that Marine did...

I dis-agree with it being panic shooting. If it would have been panic shooting they would have missed most of those shots not hit them.

Dink

They are not supposed to be our enemies, for sure. But if they're violating our fundamental rights, such as to remain secure in our homes, to that extent, the times they are a-changing.

That wouldn't be good enough for me if it were my father/brother/son who was killed. I'd want them ALL DEAD, no if ands or buts, preferably by my hand.

Over my lifetime I have gone from the utmost respect for Law Enforcement to a deep loathing for what they have become. My wife worked for our local force for six years and has lost her respect for LEO in general. Excessive force and lethal trampling of basic individual rights need to be reined in, and present SWAT teams need to be disbanded. Start over with a different philosophy...Protect life first, and stop the knock and crash mindset.

If this offends the good and responsible LEO here, I apologize to them. I still feel as I do, however.

But if
================

Keep that caution front and center,schoolmarm!

There have been home invasions around here where the criminals were wearing tactical gear.

This kind of SWAT crap makes the Heller case ruling on the right of self defense a sad joke. Exercise your rights with peril.

I believe that I feel that very same way.

Blackheart;

I can't/won't say what I'd like to see happen if the idea I put out wouldn't fly...

Crazy; not stupid.

The excuse for all this was the war on [some] drugs. That needs to go. If neither party to a transaction can be considered a victim, then no cops need to be involved.

Uh...that's not the kind of protection I want.

Brought to you by a graduate of the Hitler/Nietzsche school of legal brief writing. Damn you're dumb.

Cole, you got that right!

always on his knees calling someone dumb!! That's hilarious.

Our local LEO's won't even pursue a known child molesters vehicle in my neighborhood; they did have time to harass a guy in a wheelchair about burning yard waste (something he had done there for 35 years) whilst this happened.

I wouldn't put it past them to put on their black suits to enforce the burn ban.

The next town over, the police are pretty damn good..

Very well stated. I'd like to predict how all this will end, the OIC who gave the go order will be "reassigned/promoted", everyone else will be "reprimanded", and a civil suit will net a large sum for the widow. None of these bastards will ever serve a day.

Had this happened in Iraq, the OIC would be summarily relieved, and license plate manufacture would be their next line of work, at Leavenworth.

The odds of the police being around when you need protecting are slim and none. When seconds count the police are only minutes away. It is the responsibility of each adult citizen to be able to protect his/herself.

I REPEAT,....WHERE the [bleep] is Tucson's esteemed Liberal Sheriff Clarence Dupnik ?

The one with the problem with "Nice Dialogue",...the Obee bag licker....?

GTC

I heard an old preacher say that a man can't stumble when he's on his knees, maybe you should give it a go.

You would think gibberish is well stated. Keep lurking and quit embarrassing yourself,moron.

==============================

What else did your preacher say while you were on them?

60 OF 71 is stellar accuracy compared to most deadly force shootings. Well below 50% is more the norm.

With the exception of a few astute and wiser men here,this is simply another game show thread of "let's make up schit as we go along".

I know all lawyers aren't white trash, just the majority.

Proximity has that effect.

Why go slamming the white trash like that.

Similar situation happened near where I live. Cops bash in a door and the first thing they do is shoot the family dog, a Lab.
You kick in my door at 5am and you may get shot at. You shoot my dog and you will DAMN sure without a doubt be shot at!

There was also another incident a number of years ago where they entered the wrong house and shot to death an 80 year old man who was armed with a revolver and still sitting in his recliner. The house they wanted was on the next street over!

Why can't they grab these "suspects" when they leave the house instead of conducting invasions?

These things are as sad and senseless as when they conduct a high speed chase over a traffic violation and kill innocent bystanders.

As a youngster I looked up to the police. As a young adult I had a few close friends that were cops. Now however, I have very little respect for the cops I come in contact with. Hell, I've got one lives across the street. I've tried numerous times to be a friendly neighbor and he's just not interested. Anymore, we the civilians, are just considered to be the enemy. I don't know what they are teaching these guys anymore, but "To serve and protect" no longer seems to apply.

You don't know schit. You haven't from day 1,nitwit!

Agreed.

And yet, all of which, insufficient.

Most police shootings (in the 80-90%) are from six feet and closer>

By my settings it only took us four pages to reach the trifecta....We've decided what happened at a place we weren't at, why it happened in a situation we know nearly nothing about and how it will all pan out in the future.

We're getting good, but we're pretty well experienced at it....

How close were they?

Dink

You might be a little off-base, friend.

No schit,man!

yeah, there are a LOT cop killings and no knock warrants gone bad to discuss, eh?

Man you done spoke a mouthfull. Old Nostrademus ain't got nothing on us.

BCR

====================

And then again,I might not.

Don't see any stench on this raid?

There are also a lot more cops being ambushed and killed. Cause & effect, I don't know, but the cops paying the price are not the ones doing the no knocks. They are answering complaints and doing traffic stops.

Just some food for thought.

Why were there bullet holes going into the house from outside? Not just one by many?

Considering it was inside the house.....

Oh, that's right, I'm sure this 26 year old working class young Marine working night shifts at a cooper mine with 2 young kids was living in a posh 40,000 square foot home where the firefight (one sided) took place across the indoor tennis court.

==============

Not yet,no. Nor do you. Not a stench that's based in fact,anyways. I'm the first one to jump on a bad cop,if he/she is deserving. I'm simply going to have all my facts before I go there. That strategy is what seems normal to me. Some MsMV.

The point is none of us know. At a minimum there were three weapons that had to be shot. So this probaly did not happen at contact distance.

Keep in mind that they were at that working class marines residence to serve a dope warrant. Not once did I read that they had the wrong residence so they were in the right place.

Dink

Bad cops, bad warrants, bad guys.....

What we KNOW FOR SURE is that this is sad. Kids will grow up without a dad, which is a tragedy regardless of what the facts turn out to be.

I'm just pointing out that a little logic would dictate that the distance was, in all probability, pretty darn close.

I haven't made any other assumptions in this and certainly wouldn't leap to any conclusions that they were or were not in the right place or that the intel they received in the first place, to request the warrant, was golden or garbage.

Now, someone else might point out that the Sheriffs office is playing this real close to the vest, refusing to answer any questions other than recanting their original claim that the victim fired his rifle.

And given Sheriff Dupnik's history of running his mouth when he doesn't have the facts (see the Gifford's shooting), someone else might point out that ol' Dupnik would very likely be shouting from the mountaintop that his boys WERE in the right place and found a ton of cocaine and that it was absolutely a righteous shoot...... Someone else might point that out...., but I'm not willing to just yet.

"They found nothing in the house that was illegal,"

"And the Pima County sheriff scolded the media for "questioning the legality" of the shooting." (that's [bleep]' DUPNIK, champion of the 2A, doncha' know)

"He was asleep in his Tucson home after working a night shift at the Asarco copper mine...." if he's workin' for Asarco Mine, his pizz tests are on record,....(like MINE, GTC).....not to many "Dealers" would be found there. IMHO.

"At first the Pima County Sheriff's Office said that Guerena fired first, but on Wednesday officials backtracked and said he had not. "The safety was on and he could not fire," according to the sheriff's statement."

You just keep on defending this sorta' behavior, it seems to be what you do best (and LOUDEST)

Sheeesh

GTC

You do know that saying something smells bad...is not the same as cop bashing...something smells bad before you have all the facts...It is or isn't bad after you have them

Assassination then?

Seems to me, the whole police culture has changed. When I was a kid, we were taught that cops were your friend, AND THEY WERE! Recently, (over the last 15 years, or so)I see cops in a lot of military-type clothing. Seems to me that "they" have become antagonistic "Rambo-wannabe's", or in plain language - The Enemy - to regular civilians.
Many ex-police that I know well agree.
That said, I will await the evidence.
Mark

Wow! You really reveal yourself for the punk you are.

Gotta justify the budget, dont'cha know.

God, I hate that I've gotten this cynical.

Sure,I understand that. I'll clarify. The predisposition to believe something smells bad,at the outset and without facts in support, is troubling to me.

Where's the adrenaline rush in that?

"Keep in mind that they were at that working class marines residence to serve a dope warrant. Not once did I read that they had the wrong residence so they were in the right place.

Dink"

Nothing illegal was found. Makes me think they were very much in the wrong place.

Yep, because the raiders wear masks and don't display their names as required by law. Pretty smart of them, don't you think?

71 shots fired inside a home where they know of a woman and a child. Nothing illegal was found. No knock warrant. A veteran. Guessin our sense of smell is different.

Can you get me out of it if I shoot an intruder 60 times?

That's it in a nutshell....

If it is ruled a righteous shooting,the number of shots is legally irrelevant.

+1

Jesus! An hour before medics were allowed? Wtf?

So it matters not for my defense if I reloaded my 6 shooter 10 times...

Exactly.

Oh yeah...that too on the smell bad chart

Don't want him testifying, don't you know.

I'm guessing the simple answer is that there was no rush for the medics by that stage...

============

Are you making up facts,again?

=================

The simpler answer is it is always proper protocol to insure no more shooters exist before sending in medics.

So it doesn't smell bad that it took an hour to clear a house?..likely a small one.

There are some known facts:

Marine is dead.

Marine never fired his weapon.

SWAT fired 71 shots, despite Marine never firing his weapon.

Marine was in HIS HOME.

Sheriffs office has not claimed drugs were found.

What "facts", pray tell, would cause this to "smell good" to you?


Now let's just assume for a minute that this was the right house, the intel given the Sheriffs office was righteous, there was a cache of cocaine in a closet and the Marine was involved in trafficking......

The above scenario would make this a righteous shooting. However there are two very problematic issues with this event that cannot, under any circumstances be acceptable in this country.

1. 71 shots fired in a house with children, with no return fire. This is simply unforgivable and it is not based on assumption, it has been acknowledged by the Pima County SD.

2. A "no-knock" warrant in this situation, is unacceptable. Period. If you have the intel that this guy was involved in drugs, then you should also know who is living in the home and where/what time he works. If you don't, then spend a few hours finding out.

Only a complete [bleep] idiot would think it is more desirable to stage a home invasion where 2 children live, than to pick this guy up going to, at or coming back from work. Then you can search the home, with less potential for either his family, him or LEO's getting killed.

The Marine being shot while holding his rifle can be explained with missing information. The two issues above, cannot. They smell. No unknown information can make them not "smell".

Sorry jumped tracks on you...I was referring to my hypothetical shooting of an intruder. But were you saying if I had a 71 round magazine I can empty it into the intruder?

It's an 1800 sq ft house with 3 bedrooms. SWAT was already in the living room. Stevie [bleep] Wonder could clear that house in less than an hour.

No doubt thats a consideration, but it shouldn't take an hour to clear a typical house...Police probably did that, and then other normal Police stuff as would be required...

Getting the Medics to deal with the body would be somewhere down on the list of things to do, but no longer a priority...

Out of curiousity, do the Police use standard military ball in their rifles, or SP/HP ammo?

Where did it say it was a no knock warrant?

He had time to wake up, understand what was happening, get his AR, tell wife and kids to get in closet. There is alot of time there for a no knock warrant. Thats not taking into account if he had to load the the AR or not. I would think with small kids that it was out of reach of them or had to be loaded (not near the bed).

Dink

It has nothing to do with clearing the house when the possibility of 1 or more live shooters are still capable of firing weapons at either the police or unarmed medical personnel.

His wife woke him up...not the gentle knock at the door by those there to protect him.

Lets face it, beyond the basic reported facts, everything else is conjecture and speculation...

I mean how do they know the body was hit 60 times, and not say 55 or 68 or whatever?

The state the body would be in would mean an autopsy would be required to determine that..

Illogical. They busted the door down, it's not like it was a hostage situation. If you are busting doors down in a small house, you're not setting up in the living room waiting for further instructions, before clearing the 3 bedrooms and the shytter.

It's not their call to make. Back when this was my gig, medics were on standby for us and the bad guy if something went bad.

So it would never be brought up?

Strike that from the record.....right.

How did Giffords survive? Had to be a better possibility of more shooters in that instance...

Thats why I said "...by that stage"

But i do agree that I would have expected the Police to have medics on hand as part of the operation, even if they weren't allowed access immediately...

==============

Who said it couldn't be brought up? Bringing it up has nothing to do with whether it's relevant or not.

Point being its legally irrelevant, but its still going to be brought up, because it does matter.

Reverse Scarface isn't something the legal system finds redeeming...

Updated: May 19, 2011 4:45 PM EDT
By Brian White, producer - bio | email


Both sides in SWAT shooting case come out swingingNOTE: We'll be hearing from the lawyers representing the Guerenas later Thursday.

TUCSON, AZ (KOLD) - The lawyer assigned to represent the SWAT team who fatally shot a suspect said the operatives clearly identified themselves upon entering.

In a press conference held Thursday, Michael Storie -- the attorney representing law enforcement officers involved in the shooting-- said they clearly identified themselves as police in both English and Spanish.

After banging on the door for up to a minute with no answer, Storie said, the SWAT team decided to force their way in.

"This was not a no-knock warrant situation," Storie said.

SWAT operatives fired on the suspect, 26-year-old Jose Guerena, at least 60 times. Guerena pointed an assault rifle at the SWAT team as they breached the home, prompting the gunfire, Storie told reporters Thursday.

Despite initial reports from the Sheriff's Department that Guerena fired at them, deputies eventually said the suspect did not fire at the officers and that the safety mechanism was engaged.

Storie said there was a variety of situations that would've lead the SWAT team to believe that Guerena shot at them, including confusion and a false "interpretation" of the situation due to the stresses.

He described a scene full of smoke, "splinters" and sounds that could've lead to the shooting.

Ultimately, Storie said, the SWAT operatives felt threatened because Guerena pointed the assault rifle at them.

"These were not the actions of a citizen wanting a peaceful outcome," Storie said, referring to Guerena's actions.

After the shooting, the SWAT team withdrew from the house, not knowing if the suspect had been shot or not because he fell out of view, according to the lawyer. At that point, they reassessed the situation as a "barricaded person" being in the home. The attorney said the SWAT team was unsure if there were other armed suspects in the house at that time.

Medical teams were not allowed in because of this, Storie said. SWAT operatives sent in robots to ensure the house was cleared, he added.

SEARCH WARRANTS

So what was found at the home during the search? The judge assigned to the case has sealed the search warrant returns, preventing the public from knowing.

"Everything they think they're gonna find in there, they find," Storie said.

Handguns, assault rifles, part of a law enforcement uniform and body armor were found, he said. Along with a portrait of Jes�s Malverde, the patron saint of drug running. The portrait was found under the suspect's bed face up, Storie said.

Storie believes that Guerena and/or the group he was allegedly working with used the law enforcement uniforms to invade other homes.

MULTIPLE HOUSE RAID

The lawyer went into a little detail about the multiple search warrants linked to this case that SWAT operatives were serving that day.

Storie said that determining the timing of calls made that day to 911 will be important in the case. He believes that Guerena's wife called one of the houses being searched to notify those suspects her husband had been shot.

He thinks this because residents in those homes screamed at law enforcement when they arrived.

"How did he get this information?" Storie asked. "This information had to come from within this house, from the wife, to the relatives."

OTHER NOTES

Storie said a "hit" was made on a law enforcement officer's license plate after driving by his house for surveillance purposes.

Storie believes Guerena noticed the surveillance unit driving by and had the plate checked against Department of Motor Vehicle records. The records on that plate were pulled minutes after driving by, he said.

Especially with two kids in the house. And if they didn't know there were two kids in the house, then this enters a second layer of ineptitude.

The house is in his and the wife's name, if the SD did the home work of a 1st grader, they would know there would be kids in the house at that time.

This wasn't some crackhouse in a bad neighborhood. The house next door is 12-15' away and these houses are wood frame and stucco. Unless they were using frangible loads, they could easily have killed the neighbors firing 71 times.

The plot thickens.

Yes,it sure does.

Now I am willing to say that it smells less bad...but there are points that still don't add up to smelling good.

Thanks, that only makes these morons sound more incompetent.



"up to a minute" LMAO.... So they don't really know and "up to a minute"...could be 20 seconds apparently... with this group of Barney Pfifes as they didn't bother to time it and they apparently don't have a protocol for how long to wait after knocking. Never mind that "up to a minute" is enough time for someone to get out of bed, get dressed and answer the door? On what planet?



So the smoke, splinters and sounds from their own weapons.... is the justification for the shooting? This weasel is a hoot. Wonder where he went to law school, West Pima County Community College and online law degrees LLC?

Like I said,it's best to wait and see how the facts develop. If this man was part of a drug and home invasion operation,then everyone calms down....if they're sane and rational,that is.

If the "heat" F'd up,those kids and their mommy will have their redress,bigtime.

But yes,just 3 hours later there appears to be more insight making this matter,as is most often the case,another situation comprising two sides of a dynamic situation.

You're flailing in your back-pedal,FB!

And all I ever said was that it smelled bad.

But for the bolded part...don't mean chit...

I was trained that no amount of dope is worth dying or killing over. There will always be more sometime in the future if the evidence gets flushed. Forcing the op with children present is bad juju in the making.

Nothing illegal was found in the house.

An Ambulance was there in 2 minutes and was not allowed to care for him.



These two points of information will not help the Police in the civil case that will be filed against them.

Looks like they had to kick down the door and shoot the place up...no other choice?

One thing about it, whether your a cop or drug runner, being on the offensive, dressing up, kicking down doors and shooting up a place is a good way to kill someone.

Everyone likes to be Scarface..

1. Obviously the car was unmarked or no one would bother to check it.

2. If some dumbass kept driving by my house and I had access to checking who's it was, who here wouldn't check it, since obviously it was not identifiable as law enforcement?

3. And what is Storie alleging by this statement? He has no clue (remember he "believes") whether the house across the street or 50 other houses in the neighborhood ran that search, maybe even a cop 4 houses down who thought a car casing the area looked suspicious.

This Storie character is more annoying than Sheriff Dupnik. He's sounds straight out of Casino or Goodfellas, like a greasy little mafia mouthpiece.

Perhaps it wasn't a drugs bust but a turf war?

===========

As to his kids,I guess daddy shouldn't have pointed the rifle at the cops then. They knew LE was at their house to serve a warrant,I'm guessing.

Or perahps daddy shouldn't have been in that line of work at all if he was concerned about his kids..

I think most want to go home to their loved ones.

[quote=HawkI]Looks like they had to kick down the door and shoot the place up...no other choice.

One thing about it, whether your a cop or drug runner, being on the offensive, dressing up, kicking down doors and shooting up a place is a good way to kill someone.

Everyone likes to be Scarface.. [/quote

It's funny you mention that because he's a cult hero for many druggie types. I've been in more than a few houses that have scarface memorabilia plastered all over the walls. Not that it's a bad thing.

IDK...If someone yells "Police" and kicks in my door...I am unloading...why???Because I know there is no reason for them to kick in my door...even if they are police.

Backpedal? The more I hear, the worse it looks.

I've said all along, I won't fault the SWAT team for shooting if it turns out to be a righteous shoot. The guy was holding a rifle and If I am busting down that door, I am probably shooting as well.

The number of shots given the circumstances and the fact this was ordered at all, are the troubling parts.

I'm guessing he armed himself because he did know. Schit man...now you got me speculating. I'll wait for the follow-up stories.....and some more facts.

If the shooting was legit,I'll gladly represent the heat. If it was a baddie,I'll take the family and retire after my 1/3rd.

I'm thinking they didn't break down Ghandi's door,though.

Bob,

I'm pretty in tune to what most LEO's want to do; these guys are acting like they had no choice but to do what they did.

They didn't when they made it personal...

Bull chit.



Last I checked, it wasn't against the law to own any of those things. When the best thing you've got is that the guy had a picture of someone, you're really grasping for straws.



Bull chit.

Brian.

Pointing a firearm at a cop is a risky proposition for sure. Hell, half the cops coming out of academies nowadays are trained to call their supervisor who then calls the chief who then calls the city manager who then calls the liability attorney to authorize the now dead cop to use deadly force.

Keyword.


Sorry, but if I am clean and someone busts down my door in black clothes, I've got my AR on them at the door. Not like there are no home invasions in Arizona.

If this was regular SD officers in green/blue etc., and SD vehicles lit up outside, then I would be less cautious. There is no way I am letting ninja's bust down my door and not protect my family.

This is the downside of SWAT units if the house is clean, they look and act just like the bad guys would.

Like I said...startin to smell less bad...but with the original story...there was a smell...and If I shot at a deer 71 times...hit him 60...I would not have to send in a robot to determine the likelyhood of his causing me harm.

How many guys trafficking drugs do you guess live in newer neighborhoods in $113,000 homes and work night shift at the copper mine?

Maybe some guy selling quarter bags on the side to friends..... but then if they're using SWAT home invasions to bust a guy for that, that's [bleep] up in and to itself.

Guys involved in serious trafficking that would draw a SWAT home invasion don't usually fit the facts of this guys life. An assumption, I realize, but it sure doesn't follow the norm.

Would home invasions fit your norm,FB?

===============

You armchair SWAT guys got a handle on it all. Like they knew how many times he was hit. He moved out of view...you don't walk into the possibilty of being shot unless you know for certain,period. They used robots to clear the area and there is nothing improper about that,if their factual recitation proves accurate. If this man was part of a drug dealing/home invasion operation,I'll fall asleep 5 minutes after my head hits the pillow.

Sheriff's office said the Marine's rifle was on safe. How many Marines do you figure fresh out of the Corp, forget to take the safety off if they intend to shoot?

If he was ex Air Force, I'm down with that potential...not a Marine. For all we know he got his rifle, aimed at them until he verified who it was, then put the safety on and was lowering it when Barney Pfife started shooting.

No way, no how.... a 26 year old former Marine bad guy, intending to shoot cops, forgot how to use an AR 2-3 years out.

Let me interpret this for you. An entry team of several armored up/loaded for bear county hoodlums breach the door. A lone "drug runner" is on the other side of the breached door with a gun. He doesn't fire a shot. Said team of hoodlums sees gun and runs the [bleep] back out the same door they just destroyed....and for an hour, they just stand around to establish "scene safety". Where I come from, this is called abject cowardice. Your life and the life of the rest of the entry team depends on the #1 and #2 man both making it to opposing corners in the room you just entered, each man clearing his corner as he goes in, there is no other way to clear a room. You do this or you die in the attempt, it is that simple. If you don't have the cajones for this, you are a poser, as these thugs obviously are. It is still argueable if this former Marine was guilty of anything, it is not argueable that these thugs are despicable human beings, barely worthy of the title.

When two of you are carrying shotguns and four full auto's, it don't take long to put 60 holes in somebody.

Still can't phathom how I would not know a guy who was shot 60 times...was still a threat or not...but I am out. You are right...all perfect in the world...no sleep loss for me either

That means nothing...the Police could have shot him before he had time to take the safety off..

If the SWAT guys believed he was part of a violent home invasion crew and a former Marine, they were probably not going to take any chances...

The article said the wife's sister? (I think) recently had a home invasion. So it would be something potentially on their mind, no?

All I know is what I would do if my son saw someone in black outside the window and the door busted down and I'm a lilly white clean citizen.

Considering the Indiana Supremes ruling, I hope you are as cautious as well, my friend.

You need to stick with chasin' ambulances, the more you talk, the more stupid you look. You obviously ain't cut out for that line of work either.

If someone busts through my door...I am not taking any chances either...

Just be quicker than that former Marine was then...

Does depend on how long he had the weapon in his hand. One would have to assume he didn't keep it in the living room and from accounts that is where the confrontation took place.

I don't blame the SWAT guys for shooting, they think they're entering a bad guy's house and he's holding an AR. Easy action.

The safety on is merely a possible clue that the guy was merely trying to protect his family.

You won't stand a chance if you are a hijacker and they know it.

What are my chances if I live next door to the Hijacker?

SWAT crews aren't generally told the people behind the door are Girl Scouts.....

Which is why they blew the chit outta this guy.

I just question that the only route was to have what happened, especially when there are officer's lives on the line as well.

And a very legitimate question, regardless of the guilt or otherwise of the dead guy..

Absolutely. Why is it no one else is questioning why they didn't pick this guy up at work, or on the way to or from?

You've been casing his house and you don't even know where or when he works?

How can it not be safer and easier for everyone, to stop him out in the open in his car, getting in or out?

This is what really annoys me, not the fact a shooting took place. You bust down doors, you are far more likely to have dead bodies than where you can physically view him and control the environment.

You never know. It may have been a overzealous decision by cops. It may have been the safest option available.

=============

Laffin'...sniff some more glue,dumb schit!

It would not be safer, if he was a real bad guy that had voiced, or displayed, the potential to go down in smoke.

There's all kinds of scenarios, but I'm sure they knew he was home, knew who else was in there and kicking down the door apparently was the only option?

If your on the back side of a SWAT team and a busted door and your armed, they're going to shoot you, dealer or not, and the guys kicking the door down aren't going to chance your nature either...

Putting all the marbles on the alleged perp ain't good business, especially when you don't have to kick a door in...

The number of shots fired is relevant because one is not privileged to use more force than is necessary to neutralize a threat. Pretty hard to argue that it required sixty rounds to neutralize the threat. Not saying it's dispositive in itself, but it is considered relevant at trial when self-defense or defense of others is the defense.

Only reason I would call the 'police' or LE for ANYTHING is if the law requires that I do so, like traffic accident or similar.

Stories like this Marine's senseless and unnecessary death do nothing but prove to me that 'gubmnt enforcers' and 'tax collectors' (ticket writers) are themselves TERRORISTS!

Then you wouldn't want to do it in a house with 2 kids in it, right?

Copper mines are usually rural, you control the where and when, much better than entering a house with kids, in an extremely crowded subdivision.

I'm open to how that could be a safer option, I just can't envision the factors that would make it so.

You're quite right, I don't know and I'm not going to call it either way... Its still a legitimate and not an unreasonable question to ask though, and something the follow up investigation would look into..

Still see no reason not to pick him up at work.

We call that digging our corners. The cops pulling back is likely their training watered sown by the admin and lawyers. The military mission objective is a different animal from an LEO op. Our training is the product of your blood, sweat, guts and tears. You have acceptable losses to accomplish the objective. Civilian cops dont operate under that mantra. That's a different mindset. That's how we are trained, most times by former military shooters.

If it were that easy there wouldn't have been a "Ruby Ridge" or "Waco".

Why don't you tell us exactly how you would have done it? First tell us what the guys history is, what the warrant(s) are for, and exactly what information you have received to indicate why you would do so.

Besides, if I hear someone banging on my door in the middle of the night, no way I'd be opening the door no matter what's being shouted. I might shout back that I'm calling the police. Might. You know how common it is for armed robbers to shout that they're the police? Police need to come back at a decent hour and act like the public servants they are, not like midnight execution squads.

==========

If you carefully read the articles,you'd know that the police did not know the threat was immobilized. Further,a multidude of shooters changes that analysis completely. Obviously,how many times he was hit isa fact only known well after the shooting.

..and when we go in, the mindset that everybody but us is gonna die ain't an option.

You know how common it is for armed robbers to shout that they're the police?
=============

Funny you bring that up since it appears there's some implied representation this dead man may have used police uniforms to participate in home invasions.The attorney for the heat said they seized what they expected to obatin during the search. We'll see.

BINGO!

I'm kinda' surprised the police shot so well.

Do they have to requalify again next year?

I've known several [former, and not "retired"] cops say something similar!

=============

I think Baker meant his weapon,not unloading into his britches.

I just had a really odd thought. WTF does this guy being a Marine have to do with anything?

Maybe it's a case of first impression!

That isn't the military option in most instances either, if it were, a standoff (read JDAM) would have been used. We use shoot/no shoot targets in our scenarios, just like you do. Once that door charge goes off though, surprise, speed, and violence of action are all that keeps your team healthy, it is also the best way to protect innocent lives inside. Dithering on a building entry is like hanging out in the middle of the interstate.

I think you have a scrip for something at Walgreens you really need to pick up.

I'll have to take your word for it, I've never been a SWAT type, though I've busted hundreds of doors as a narc, and used SWAT hundred's more. Unlike some people here, I ain't gonna pretend to know something I don't.

Benefit of the doubt I suppose...I tend to give that to our folks in uniform. I watched this thread develop and while I have problems with the "no-knock" stuff I also don't feel as though enough info (real info) is available.

I have heard of mexican and American gang bangers enlisting so they could get the best tactical training possible. It wouldn't surprise me if this could be one of those types of scenarios.

That isn't the military option in most instances either, if it were, a standoff (read JDAM) would have been used. We use shoot/no shoot targets in our scenarios, just like you do. Once that door charge goes off though, surprise, speed, and violence of action are all that keeps your team healthy, it is also the best way to protect innocent lives inside. Dithering on a building entry is like hanging out in the middle of the interstate. [/qu

Door charge? Damn they would have been nice to have.

This is one of the reasons I was cross trained as a Paramedic, for high risk cases where unarmed and not LE trained Medics would be a distraction to LE.

One class of American demigod was shot down by another class of American demigod.

True. The Founding Fathers really shouldn't have commented on Redcoats quartering troops in colonial homes, and writing their own warrants, either, because they themselves were not Redcoats. You really have to be one to have a valid opinion on their conduct.

The internet makes everyone an expert.

Well if nothing else, threads like this certainly help confirm the identity of the idiots amongst us.

Our Founding Fathers would slap the crap outta you, just for being you.

So I've heard. They really hated folks who believed as they did, I guess.

Why Blue? Have "we" drifted so far away from the Constitution that none of the Constitution, even the "old parts" matter?

..or is it just the "new Parts" matter.

..like chicks voting.....grin

Being a Marine doesn't make you a better human being. Some of our best criminals have served in the military which gave them a education to ply their trade. I have spent over half my life in the military working with people who have SCTS clearances and who are supposed to be the cream of the crop. Unfortunately, I have seen a good many of them go to prison for killing people, even their buddies, selling drugs and stealing schit that they have no business possessing. Position doesn't dictate your elevation on the moral scale.

I imagine this will ruffle a few feathers here but I am willing to start putting out plenty of [bleep] names that are either in prison or dead but they were supposed to be good military men.

That it do. But then opinions are like arseholes, we all have one and a lot of them stink!

It shouldn't, and everybody should know I'm one of their greatest fans.

How much does a bantha weigh?

come on Pete, how do the coppers do it in your country?

Because if Thomas Jefferson were a Campfire-ite 90% of his posts wouldn't be "Yep", "+1" and Prison Planet insanity.

That would be odd. Is there someone who fits that description here?

They couldn't care less. Probably went out ate a burger and bragged about getting away with murder.

Since no one else has answered this, I nominate TakeAKnee to go ahead.

He seems to have plenty of criticism for the cops and all the answers...he even new which way they should turn after they walked in the door.

Not to mention that Johnny Tactical name he's got.

==================

I doubt on his knees could take out a cheeseburger at a drive through window.

Yep.

Dude!!

Don't like this anymore than the next man BUT I seriously doubt that.

What about the holes in the wall of the house fired from the outside in?

That changes everything.

It sure does. In the video I counted about six holes fired from the outside in. Of course, I guess it could have been somebody else's house. We all know how the MSM is.

On that, my friend, we agree.

Really?

I just had another really weird thought. What difference does it make if the saftey was not off on the dude's rifle?

About as much as if it wasn't loaded either...

Reassign my azz.

Sometimes it takes someone not so close to something, and with a moral compass, to see that opening up with automatic weapons in a house with 2 kids, over a drug warrant is unacceptable in a free society.

The fact you've obviously become desensitized to right and wrong from your "experiences" is a reflection on you, not others who might have a viable opinion. This is precisely why our nation established civilians over it's military and police forces.

So, this was a drug warrant?

Very well said.

I don't think its wise to paint Pat with that brush; I'm sure he and other LEO's can give you ten million first hand examples of true schitballs that need gone and the stress from being in that situation DAILY.

The main blame for the children being in this situation is the supposed occupation of the father.

I still do not understand why this became a SWAT situation, which is last resort IMO and lives best be on the line if doors need kicked down, not just to exercise a [bleep] warrant for dope...

Gotcha. I never saw what the warrant was actually for.

Copper mining?

Perhaps I was rough on Powell with that, but I didn't like the arrogance of the statement that the rest of us don't have a clue, when it's really a question of right and wrong, not some hyper technical police protocol.

When we send SWAT into a house with 2 kids with machine guns on no knock narcotics warrants, we have transcended common sense and allowed law enforcement the option of doing what fits their schedule and goals, rather than following our Constitution.

That kind of reminds me of a man shot 33 times by local police.
Actually three rounds of buckshot but it was 33 times by the paper's account.

It's impossible to say if the decision to do a hard entry was the best route, but being familiar with serving multiple warrants on a single organization, the luxury of choosing when, and where, are limited.

FWIW, my apologies, LtPowell for insinuating that you don't have a moral compass.

My problem wasn't with the LE personnel, other than potentially the number of shots fired. My issue is with the Pima County Sheriffs Department that made these decisions.

Doesn't that beg the question? Aren't you presuming guilt?

Is this the statement you are refering too?

It is a predetermined factor (not fact), else they wouldn't have a warrant, now would they?

Guilt was not predetermined and I should have used "alleged" for clarification.

Sounded like you were blaming the dad for endangering his son by engaging in something that he's presumed not to be involved in, i.e., drug trafficking.

Actually, I was referring to this:

That's what I get for being humble.

It was presumed he was involved in drug trafficking, by the warrant being issued.

They don't issue warrants because your suspected of nothing.

Well, I thought that was a followup to the tactics you asked me to set out. I had to pick up my wife from the airport though and just got back.

Regardless, these threads always get personal, which is why I usually avoid them. People here tend to be 100% pro LE or 100% anti, I try to see both sides. I respect how difficult the job is, but I fear where we're headed.

Like I said above, I apologize.

I hear ya.

My point is that once the door gets kicked in, all bets are off and the responsibility for restraint isn't an obligation when the SOB on the other side has so much as a scratch awl in his hand...

For conversation....

The guy weren't shot "for a drug warrant" and weren't shot for "drugs". He were shot for pointing a rifle at the PoPo, which is a pretty reasonable reason to shoot somebody.

If the PoPo should've been where they were to get the aforementioned rifle pointed at them is a separate issue.

Please don't. Nothin to apologize for. Some of the first things you learn in LE is not to accept responsibility for anybody else's actions and not to second guess decisions made in moments that were not experienced. This ain't my first rodeo with government hating either. It was the same in the early 80's. Unfortunately, the only "government" that most people can wrap their heads around are postal workers and cops.

SWAT is perhaps the dumbest idea to evolve since the Gestapo. A bunch of overcharged males running around in Ninja outfits with fully automatic weapons with little oversight by elected officials.

The same people stood around the school in Columbine waiting for God knows what, while the two perps continued to murder people inside.

A long retired decorated LEO of my acquaintence said of Columbine, that first officer on the scene should have drawn his weapon and attempted to stop the carnage. Yeah, he/she might have been killed but "To Serve and Protect" should be more than a slogan on police cars.

The police are not your friend and they cannot protect you.

Executing a drug warrent does not require armed, agressive entry, absent threat to others inside. That's why we have the ability to isolate a premise and call in a
negotiator.

BTW he was not a Marine. He was a vet who had served in the Marine Corps.
More media BS to demonize the military.

Remember Ruby Ridge.

Not to go off on a tangent but the inaction at Columbine has pretty much changed the way most departments handle active shooters.

As far as negotiator, what happens when they fail? Drug dealers are sometimes known to have weapons and often are willing to duke it out.

You know that silence? Like when parents are taliking about Santa and a kid walks in the room?

Let's not cloud this fantasy....

Is that the government trained psychopath demigod shot down by the government trained psychopath demigod who makes up 80% of the police ranks?

I've heard framis/bosslady/et all do live in a fnatasy world.

Uncontested KOTY..

Its better than reality when you can omit all the scary parts and be perfect all the time...

He is presumed innocent, however a Judge somewhere signed off that there was probable cause for the search warrant. Hard to judge the team since none of us were there. That said if someone in the house, marine or not, safety on or not, is pointing a rifle at them, theres going to be some shooting. Like LT said it dosn't take long to fire 71 rounds with sub guns and shot guns.

Hmmmm....seems as if I recall that the local sheriff in Waco made a comment that David Koresh made frequent trips to town by himself and that he could have been taken a lot easier that way!!

That would seem to 'fit' any suspect IMO....and I've arrested quite a few folks in my day!!

This sounds like the age old questions all LEO's get from the kids of the suspect.

You don't know my mom or dad did that, why are You doing this to my mom or dad?

Why are You so mean?

Its all Your fault mom or dad is going to jail.

Question for all LEO's how do you answer these kids?

I say I'm not doing this, Your Mom or Dad has caused this to happen. You should ask Mom or Dad why they are going to jail.

TRH seems confused in what it takes to issue a warrant (search or arrest) or to arrest someone.

HINT its "probable cause" not "beyond a reasonable doubt", thats what it takes to convict someone in a criminal case.

That would be an option in the case of an arrest warrant, but wasn't this a search warrant?

This is why I do not like these threads....I say that first impression is that something smells funny...then after Bob's news report...I say it smells less funny but still something aint right...then I have TRH +1'ing me...and I have to go find some toilet paper and wipe the possibility of becoming KOTY off me...

I apologize for my ignorance, KOTY?

Give the Gestapo a break. At least no innocent dogs were shot in this murder

+1.

Kook of the Year.

Ah Ha, Thank You Sir...

I used quick reply...was meant for the general population...and KDK was correct...KOTY = Kook of the year...a title that is well deserved by TRH...

From experience I jumped straight to the last page to see if there were any updated facts...assuming of course the preceding 12 pages were full of rants and speculation?

Now I will comment since KDK educated me on KOTY, thanks again.

Its a very emotional case and written in a way to cause that reaction "SWAT kills Marine in his home" Lots of folks some even at the campfire rush to judgement, TRH tends to do this especially when it involves cops.

I think it was LT Powell that said unless you were there its best to reserve judgement until the facts come out. Thats what I learned in the academy years ago and it has served me well and continues to do so. If the cops were in the wrong it will come out, and they will be held accountable. If they are innocent that will come out too. Remember the DUKE athletes the media was so sure rapped the stripper? Snap judgement sure didn't help them.

Lord knows our justice system is not perfect but its the best going.

Just my 2 cents, which does not matter at all...

I have no idea what happened, I was not there.

I have feelings for both parties involved. I like Marines and cops.

The cops wanted to go home to their families. The Marine's family lost a member of the family.

It sucks no matter which way you look at it.

Mistakes were made.

I didn't see the news report where this was being tried as such.

I think there's plenty of time yet for a new KOTY to show up.

Your correct Mac, I didn't mean to insinuate they were on trial...

A search warrant is issued when a reasonable person would believe, based on information currently available, that there is a better than even chance that criminal evidence is located at the residence. This does not establish a presumption of guilt. All are to be presumed by agents of the state innocent of a crime until proven otherwise in a court of law.

While I favor the keeping of the peace, and thus peace officers, I cannot be, without reservation, pro law enforcement, because these days many of our laws are entirely tyrannical. When an agent of state enforces them, therefore, he is enforcing tyranny, which is why I often refer to cops as tyranny enforcers to be more precise. A peace officer only responds to authentic victimization and disturbances of the civil order, and is not an unthinking enforcer of laws. After all, the German Gestapo were law enforcers too, but they were not peace officers, therefore a moral person, it seems to me, cannot simply take a pro law enforcement stance.

You're referring to my statement last year that the modern American military is attempting to transform well intentioned young men into psychopathic killers, i.e., people who can kill combatant and noncombatant alike without remorse. I stand by it. It's a byproduct of a regime committed to perpetual hostile military occupation of foreign nations. Those young men come back home, after far too many such tours of duty, apply for jobs as police officers, and rise to high ranking, policy making, and training positions, in police departments. This is part of the problem we're experiencing in the police culture today. But my statement is intended as a broader criticism of the regime, not as a criticism of veterans, who are equally victims of this perpetual war regime.

Probable cause doesn't equate to presumption of guilt.

interesting to see the forum LEOs so quick to name a cop doubter as a kook.

As to the cops, if in the wrong, being held "accountable", that does little to make up for the death of a Citizen.

===========

That's what he was trying to teach you. You did seem confused but,what else is new?

+1

There have been enough facts disclosed to draw two conclusions :

The administrator who decided to raid this house with children inside , at night , is a bona fide idiot who should be locked up .

The cops who busted into the house behaved in a cowardly fashion .

Me confused?? I think you need to try harder to keep up.

Totally agree...In a lot of cases, the discipline in the Forces keeps them under control, but they go off the rails when they get out..

But also, the Military does turn many troubled young men onto the straight and narrow and turn them into productive citizens..

Both statements are undeniably true.

Will be interesting to see what evidence, the no doubt upcoming wrongful death civil suit, will reveal.

Betcha a box of donuts the controlling governmental unit will settle out of court.

Remember Amadou Diallo ? Cost the good taxpayers of New York City THREE MILLION DOLLARS and those officers (?) only shot 41 rounds at him.

Stay tuned.

It couldn't be the 30 different account names here.........nah

DITTOS!

A peace enforcer uses retaliatory force.

A tyranny enforcer initiates force.

A big difference. I'm PRO peace enforcer, I'm ANTI tyranny enforcer.

Today, 95% of all laws and ordinances passed are tyranny against reasonable innocent persons.

Holy freakin' crap...

As stated before, if the cops were wrong, send them to Iraq and Afghanistan.

However, as to why it was done this way...

Hmmmm....

Multi-house search (thus, why you wouldn't try to bag one of the guys leaving work and tip off the others);

Not a "no-knock" warrant;

Paraphenalia indicating possible connections to home invasions and trafficking;

Does it suck that the guy was a Marine?

Yeah, it does, as he could very easily have been involved in what the cops were/are saying he was involved in, and thus a disgrace to us all.

We'll find out, soon enough... Though, this thread does point out some prize-winners (most of whom were already known).

Calling a 30 second knock and crash, NOT a No-Knock warrant, is like saying you didn't rape the girl, because she was unable to say "no" with the duct tape over her mouth.

True, but still total BS without quantifying data. I live near a military installation that is 60+ yrs old. They had their first homicide a couple of years ago, and it was a love triangle/jealous husband scenario. My daughters go to this base to use the running trails, track, bike trails etc. I don't have to worry about them. Don't tell me that GI's are not a higher class of people, to say otherwise is bullschit. Ask the guys at USAA who figure out their actuary tables. That is why non-mil folks can't buy insurance at USAA, 'cause they on average are less intelligent, have poorer judgement, and are a greater risk.

TUCSON, Ariz. -- According to the lawyer defending the SWAT team that killed Jose Guerena, the Iraq war vet they shot 60 times in a raid was part of a home invasion ring. His family says prove it.

On May 5 members of the Pima County SWAT team were serving a search warrant at the Guerena family home.

The sheriff's department said the home was part of a narcotics conspiracy case.

"The information they had that there was an organization in town, a violent organization that was dealing in drugs, drug rip offs, home invasions," said attorney Michael Storie.

Storie will be representing the five SWAT members who fired more than 70 shots at Jose Guerena, ultimately killing him. Storie says, in Guerena's home, PCSD found exactly what they expected.

"They found body armor, they found guns, they found assault rifles at least a piece of a law enforcement uniform," said

Through attorney Christopher Scileppi, the Guerena family is asking the sheriff's department to release all the information on the shooting.

Scileppi believes PCSD is trying to hide something.

He says Storie's explanation is the fourth one that has come out since the shooting.

"They realize that mistakes were made and they're going to try to do everything they possibly can to cover those mistakes," said attorney Christopher Scileppi. "This is an attempt by the lawyer for the SWAT team to discredit and defame my client and get their story straight."

Storie on the other hand says that's just not true.

He says the SWAT team went in clearly marked, was forced to shoot, then found the evidence they believed was there.

"He is merely making reckless and ridiculous statements out there that have done nothing but misinform the community," said Storie.

Storie says it doesn't matter that Guerena didn't fire first. He was holding the assault rifle, and raised it to fire rather than drop it when the SWAT team told him to.

Actually, that's false. Non-military can buy insurance through USAA; so long as their parents or guardians were military.

Of course, USAA also discriminates against enlisted personnel, too.

A non-military son or daughter of an officer can/will get better rates than a 20+ year enlisted soldier/sailor/Marine.

It has nothing to do with actuarial tables; it has everything to do with the original formation of USAA and it's board governance.

Myself and my entire family at home are USAA members and I have dealt with them,insurance and banking since I was 16 years old. The exact same holds true for NFCU.

Right. And, you never served a day. Your father did.

Not stating anything positively or negatively about you, just the facts as to how USAA does business.

FWIW, I'm not and won't be, as I'll be damned if a kid who has never and will never serve Day 1 is going to get a better rate through a company that supposedly caters to military and former military simply because he's grandson of an officer, whereas I was "merely enlisted", and thus don't qualify as "good enough".

Not so, says the SCOTUS.

Well said again, and spot on.

Right. And, you never served a day. Your father did.
============

That's the exact point I intended to confirm.

Exactly.

FWIW, and to further that point, your step-daughters could and would get a better auto insurance rate, simply by association with a grandfather who served, than I could, even though I served and my driving record is rather impeccable (not to mention being a far lower actuarial risk than a teenaged kid).

My stepdaughter has better rates than I do and her vehicle is 2 years old. I couldn't believe it and she's had 1 fender bender and a ticket.

Among the reasons that USAA doesn't get my business.

Compounded, of course, by their transient rules as to who does/doesn't qualify for coverage.

Ah, no. Better check Wilson vs. Arkansas.

Announce presence AND provide residents with an opportunity to open the door.

There are mitigating factors to avoid the wait, but they must be proven. The most obvious being imminent danger to the LEO's. They're going to have a hard time with that, since they stated that they backed out of the home AFTER recognizing the target was armed.

There goes... "we went in because we saw he had a rifle" right down the shytter.

I love USAA. NFCU,on the other hand, has really been pissing me off,lately.

USAA does great for those that it takes, when it decides to take them, and if they can stomach being discriminated against if prior service and not an officer.

I'm with USAA and that is annoying. However they have at least allowed former enlisted that didn't join during active duty, to now join. Didn't help me since I'm on through my wife who is on, because her father was an officer. LOL makes sense, right?

No, they still decide who gets in and who doesn't. They determine what qualifications, discharge (their own definitions of "honorable" as sufficient"), and all the rest.

Oh, and even if you get in, you're still charged more than the grandchild of an officer, who that child and that child's parent, never served a day.

There's more. Get this...my father put 1000.00 into a NFCU account when my son was born. He'll be 24 years old in August. NFCU is already courting him as a esteemed 25 year member and touting the benefits he'll receive because of it....like a automatic savings of 1 further point on loan transactions..

My son didn't even know of the account until last month.

That's what I was saying.

I got in through my wife who didn't serve, who got in through her officer father.

When they opened it up to former enlisted, I asked about getting my own account and was told, "sure, you qualify" but your rates would be higher due to my wife's account getting length of insured discounts. They didn't mention "officer" discounts, but that is possible.

That, I can understand. He had an account there, even if he didn't know it.

That, makes sense.

Giving preference points to a kid whose parent wasn't even thought of, much less the kid, when Granddad served one hitch as a butter bar.... over a lifer E-8.... is patently ridiculous.

One thing seems abundantly clear at this point: some folks are not about to let the facts (or the lack thereof) get in the way of their agenda.

I am seeing distinct parallels these days with what went on during the Vietnam era when people took out their dislike/distrust of the Federal government and it's policies on the troops.

At least we learned from that sorry chapter, and once again hold our troops in high esteem, even if we differ in our views of the wars.

Now, it seems that many are taking out their frustrations with the goverment, and/or the current adminsitration, on public employees in general, and peace officers in particular...

What a crock of shyt.

Ah no...United States VS Banks... LINK

15-20 seconds was enough time for Banks, who was in the shower and never heard the knocks.

You can disagree with the reasonableness of 30 seconds, but it does not violate what the SCOTUS has set as a similar precedent, which is all I was saying.

Foxbat: how dare anyone differ with you...

If someone doesn't answer, come back a few hours later, or the next day and knock again. A search warrant was never intended to be an execution order, and convenience of the cops be damned if avoiding inconvenience means you have to batter someone's door down, guns at the ready, because he was in the shower or asleep when you knocked.

A thought popped into my head just now, mostly unrelated: do LEO keep a guy like this on retainer, just in case, or did they go out and find a lawyer after the incident went down?

He's likely an attorney hired by the city's insurance company.

And yes, the insurance companies keep attorneys handy for all sorts of things, not just LEO. I talked to an insurance rep once about it. Most of their claims are because potholes messed up people's car alignment.

Exactly, you can argue the reasonableness of it as seen by you...But they didn't violate what the SCOTUS has set as a precedent.

Maybe so. Can't comment on that point for lack of on hand information, but it means next to nothing to me either way. If the SCOTUS authorizes a police state maneuver in violation of the original intent of the Fourth Amendment, that doesn't make it any less a police state maneuver in violation of the original intent of the Fourth Amendment. The law in any piece of legislation, or any clause of the Constitution, is found exclusively in the original intent of the framers, not in the post hoc "interpretation" (for "public policy considerations") of the Supreme Court. The latter, to the extent that it departs from original intent, constitutes a form of despotism, i.e., that imposed by a group of specially anointed men in black robes.

And here's another for you... Young VS City of Killeen

If Young's movements gave Olson cause to believe that there was a threat of serious physical harm, Olson's use of deadly force was not a constitutional violation. Tennessee v. Garner, --- U.S. at ----, 105 S.Ct. at 1701, 85 L.Ed.2d at 9-10. The only fault found against Olson was his negligence in creating a situation where the danger of such a mistake would exist. We hold that no right is guaranteed by federal law that one will be free from circumstances where he will be endangered by the misinterpretation of his acts.

Even though the officer made procedural mistakes leading up to the use of force, the reasonableness of the use of force is determined by the facts and circumstances then known to the officer (Graham V Connor) and not the decisions that were made that led up to the use of force.

Granted, that came out of the 5th Circuit...I doubt the 9th (Arizona) would have ruled similarly.

This is starting to get a lot of national attention.

AND the cops are LYING out there teeth.



http://abcnews.go.com/US/tucson-swat-team-defends-shooting-iraq-marine-veteran/story?id=13640112


This is nothing but MURDER.

Just from the what the aritcle/wife stated.

He had enough time to be woke up, comprehend what was going on, tell his wife to get in a closet, get his AR, possibly load the AR and then make a decision on what he was going to do with that AR.

How much more time do you think they should have given him? Should they have waited on him to make breakfast?

He had all the time he needed to decide if he or his wife were going to open that door.

Dink

How many times do you think they should have come back and knocked on the door? 5? 10? How long would it have taken him to get rid of whatever they looking for?

It was not a execution order. The suspect and his wife made the choices that caused this to happen. They could have walked to the front door and opened it but they did not.

Dink

And then the cops murdered him.


Now the cop spin begins.



What Marine doesn't have guns?

The man worked night shift at a copper mine.

If they needed to take him into custody for whatever reason, it would have been easy enough to do so when he was getting off work.

The craziness that's going on with the police in this country is going to come to a bad end one of these days.

Your exactly right Bristoe!

Exactly my point...

What you're doing is putting the success of prosecution ahead of the life a man and his family who are presumed innocent before the law. Our nation was established for one reason, i.e., to ensure that our rights are defended, not to ensure that prosecutors can have success in putting people behind bars for victimless activities.

PS How many times does UPS have to knock? If they have to knock more than twice, should they smash the door in to deliver their package?

I guess I shouldn't have assumed you two understand what is meant by "begging the question."

When was the last time UPS was looking for evidence?. When was the last time a UPS driver arrested someone?

He is still presumed innocent until trial but that does not mean that there was not dope, police uniforms or illegal guns in the residence.

Dink

So all the guys have to do to avoid the search warrant is never answer the door? Thats sounds like college kids on a loud party call...

Blue is correct as usual...

Agreed...

It was a search warrant not an arrest warrant...

There's a huge gap between smashing down doors, guns drawn, because someone's in the shower or asleep, and allowing someone to use the ploy you're suggesting to perpetually escape a warrant. Reason lies somewhere in the middle, I think.

Doesn't matter. Present him with the search warrant as he's leaving work, then invite him to come with you to unlock the door. If he then chooses not to, inform him that you're going in whether or not he cooperates. My guess is he'd then open the door for you.

I think the most dissapointing thing about a lot of threads, is that those who know the least about the subject are often the most vocal. On a subject like this, where a gathering of the neighborhood kooks is the ultimate goal, it doesn't matter so much. Sometimes though, people really do need good information on something and the arrival of the same bunch always means that any useful discussion is over.

Yepper. That's why I rarely post on these kinds of threads.

Oh,..I don't know.

Seems to me that a pretty broad cross section of Americans are against having the police shoot them down like dogs.

That one shot right over his head I bet.

I'm pretty sure everybody feels that way, but kooks are special.

Well,...you can call me a "kook" if you want,...but government sanctioned home invasions ain't gonna fly in this country for long.

Some people take the killing of their family members pretty seriously,..and the fact that it was at the hands of a cop is incidental to them.

How TRH ever graduated law school remains a mystery.

Why he couldn't pass the bar, isn't.

Bristoe;

You've never done a damned thing, except reach for an open bottle. Don't try to make like you'd do any if/when push comes to shove.

I don't remember calling you one. I leave the interpretation of who's kooky to the masses.

Law school was a breeze. Played golf three days a week on average throughout the whole thing, and still graduated solidly in that meaty part of the curve. Never took any part of the Bar Exam I didn't pass, either.

Well then, you're smart enough to quit while you're ahead.

1. U.S. vs Banks involved Federal officers. Wilson involved State officers. There is a subtle difference set out in the two cases because State's can further restrict search criteria as conducted by State officers, but not Federal.

2. Banks held essentially the same findings as in Wilson. There are still the same mitigating factors (As I mentioned with Wilson) that can allow LE to bypass a reasonable wait. In Banks, the court found that since Banks was being searched for selling cocaine out of his home, that the mitigating factor of destroying the cocaine in the toilet was enough to bypass a reasonable wait.

3. The courts still held in Banks, as with Wilson, that LE must meet one of the 3 mitigating criteria, if they are to force entry before a reasonable time period.

The bottom line with Banks is this finding:

This case turns on the exigency revealed by the circumstances known to the officers after they knocked and announced, which the Government contends was the risk of losing easily disposable evidence. After 15 to 20 seconds without a response, officers could fairly have suspected that Banks would flush away the cocaine if they remained reticent.

If the items being sought in the warrant at the Marine's house could easily be flushed, then the "up to one minute" will probably meet the criteria for a valid 4th Amendment search under Wilson or Banks. If however, they do not, and the SWAT team can't prove that they realized they were in imminent danger by waiting (that one is going to be tough, given the retreat upon finding him armed) or that waiting would be futile, then this particular search may not be kosher.

The bottom line on Wilson and Banks is each search is different. Expectation of a reasonable wait is expected, barring recognition of one of the mitigating factors at the scene by LE.

I'm on my phone, so this'll be brief.

1. It was a SCOTUS ruling, it sets a precedent for local and federal officers.

2. It was a dope warrant.

3. See #1 in reference to a reasonable wait while serving the item contained in #2.

And who wrote the warrant and presented it to the judge?

When someone asks why they didn't go after the alleged perp, rather than his family home, they are questioning the wisdom of seeking a search warrant, instead of an arrest warrant.

The alleged crimes weren't taking place at his home, they were allegedly conducted by the perp, thus, if there was enough evidence/reasonable suspicion to get a judge to sign off on a search warrant, there probably was enough to seek an arrest warrant instead.

1. SCOTUS rulings do not automatically set equal precedence for Federal and State officers.

From Hudson v. Michigan, which was a followup ruling to Banks....



2. 15-20 seconds was only permissible given the circumstances of U.S. V. Banks.

In Souter's majority opinion, he specifically stated that each situation must prove the merits of entering early. In fact he specifically stated that although 15-20 seconds was fine in this particular case given the type of drug sought and the size of the apartment, a townhome might take several minutes to answer the door and thus barring mitigating circumstances, that might be the period required for a reasonable wait.


And the argument that 15 to 20 seconds was too short for Banks to have come to the door ignores the very risk that justified prompt entry. True, if the officers were to justify their timing here by claiming that Banks's failure to admit them fairly suggested a refusal to let them in, Banks could at least argue that no such suspicion can arise until an occupant has had time to get to the door,6 a time that will vary with the size of the establishment, perhaps five seconds to open a motel room door, or several minutes to move through a townhouse. In this case, however, the police claim exigent need to enter, and the crucial fact in examining their actions is not time to reach the door but the particular exigency claimed. On the record here, what matters is the opportunity to get rid of cocaine, which a prudent dealer will keep near a commode or kitchen sink. The significant circumstances include the arrival of the police during the day, when anyone inside would probably have been up and around, and the sufficiency of 15 to 20 seconds for getting to the bathroom or the kitchen to start flushing cocaine down the drain. That is, when circumstances are exigent because a pusher may be near the point of putting his drugs beyond reach, it is imminent disposal, not travel time to the entrance, that governs when the police may reasonably enter; since the bathroom and kitchen are usually in the interior of a dwelling, not the front hall, there is no reason generally to peg the travel time to the location of the door, and no reliable basis for giving the proprietor of a mansion a longer wait than the resident of a bungalow, or an apartment like Banks's. And 15 to 20 seconds does not seem an unrealistic guess about the time someone would need to get in a position to rid his quarters of cocaine.


Obviously Souter did not see 15-20 seconds as some benchmark that would apply in every case.

As far as this being a narcotics warrant, we don't know what they were seeking. If it was a bag of cocaine, sure, LE could rely on imminent destruction as a reason to jump the wait. If however the search was for a bale of marijuana and weapons, that's not going to be viewed by the courts the same as U.S. V. Banks if they follow Souter's guidance.

Pot, kettle....

Unlike you, I haven't painted everyone that has a differing opinion from my own in this thread, as some kind of anti-government, tinfoil wearing, conspiracy riddled, hippie, cop hater.

I could point out your apparent head in the sand, pollyanna syndrome, but that would only apply to you and not the others that disagree with me on certain aspects of this event.

You 'da man!

There are lots of reasons to seek a search warrant instead of an arrest warrant...

You don't have to disclose the identity of an undercover officer (if one was involved) on a search warrant but you do for an arrest warrant. That would make a difference in an on going investigation if more suspects are involved, which the article indicates is the case.

But mostly because I don't want just enough evidence for an arrest. I want enough evidence for a conviction of a bad guy. Hence the search warrant and subsequent gathering of evidence before an arrest.

Sure, I can see that. But can't you pick him up for questioning and then WHILE he's down at the department execute that search warrant with minimal chance of LEO's or his family getting hurt?

No adrenaline rush in that. Not to mention, you've got to justify all that expensive SWAT equipment and training.

The guys having the rush probably aren't the ones requesting the particular warrant.

I think many PD's are experiencing the same shyt that the rest of the business and government world is, meritocracy went out the door, when they had to fill middle and upper management with chicks, dykes, [bleep], political as$ kissers and minorities.

I see stuff like this as bad management/command, not necessarily bad cops.

Yes, we "kidnap" people all the time to take 'em back and run warrants, but it doesn't work in the multiple warrant simultaniously thing.

Good point.

I don't see bad cops either. I do see bad doctrine and policy

I see foolish people.

Then I'd kindly ask you to refrain from calling the SWAT Team murderers.

Now we are on to something.

I never called them murderers though what they did is murder. They snuffed out a man's life unnecessarily due to doctrine and training.

I don't like what happened in light of the Indiana Supreme court recent ruling against our 4th amendment rights
and how cops are behaving in Philly.
They need to be trained correctly.

They, the police, are ignorant of the law which as they tell us is never an excuse.

They are harassing honest civilians and violating OUR rights.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...y-open-carry-gun-owners/?test=latestnews

Or you'll whup my ass out by the see saws, I suppose.

Shut da fug up, piss ant.

That's absurd. If they committed murder, they're murderers.

Are they or not?

Keep in mind, lotsa folks call our boys in uniform murderers, based on bad decisions made by the people calling the shots (commanders / politicians / etc.).

Then they are murders. Eat it.

I see a trend taking place in our country that I don't like.

There's a subtle distinction, but an important one. If one in authority sets in motion a chain of events that he should have know had a high likelihood of resulting in someone's death, the end operators don't bear the full quantum of blame (likely something less than murder in this case, but not without any blame). The full quantum (murder proper) belongs to the one in authority who set in motion said chain of events.

As do I, and nor do I.

Y'all need to quit talkin' like that, Ya gonna get VAnimrod all worked up and he'll start runnin' his peter puffer at ya.

He's a scrapper too!

Just ask him. He'll tell ya.

Oh, I know it.

as evidence by the KOTY thread. grin

The masses are kooky.

How the hell did we get this far off the original story. As I read it the wife spotted one of the SWAT guys at a bedroom window pointing a gun and hollered to the husband, I don't remember the part about the Knock & crash. Did I miss something.

I ain't gonna fault anybody unless I am made privy to the entire story. Sheesh, remember that the word assume breaks do to ass-out-of-U & Me.

The Police are claiming that the deceased was a member of a drug/home invasion ring that had been working the area. The cops say they found body armor, weapons, and a "piece" of a cop uniform. All of which a member of the military might have,..except for the piece of uniform, don't know what that might be.

Couldn't find the text, but here's a video that's up to date.

[b][color:#3333FF]Video Clip...![/color][/b]

There's definetly more to the story. Either the deceased was dirty, or the cops are trying to cover up a mistake.

Anyone know what time this happened? I have read morning but I am wondering if it was daylight or not.

Dink

Well we now know he emotional motivating factors of everyone involved...surely we can figure out what time it happened.

Dastardly!!

The guy owned an AR and body armor. Wow..... available to every one of us from Midwayusa etc. My BIL has his armor from Iraq and a couple AR's. Who knew he was really gangbanger?

I bet the AR forum here is being monitored and everyone there is on a list for a SWAT raid...

Piece of cop uniform? Well, who knows what that is, but if it was something really damning, wouldn't one expect they'd point that out? Nothing would shut up the cynics quicker than stating that the guy had a PCSD badge in his drawer.

This is a sad situation regardless of circumstances. I nust hope ther is an unbiased, honest investigation.

A pair of blue trousers?

Considering how vague they're being about it, probably a velcro patch base..... no Marine would own one of those...

The real crime here is the use of the word trousers.

LOL.

I figured out what was going down by dinner yesterday and you guys are still flailing away with the guesses,huh? And now the cops are murderers,too. WOW.....we got ourselves some real imaginative dingbats here!

Not you FB,as you know.

I'm gonna kick all your doors down this year in Beat the Penguin. Trousers or not I intend to collect! Especially from that Swamp Romp dood down in LA.

Let'em go Bob...this may all come in handy some day.

Pfffttt. You boys know who the 800lb gorilla is in that room.







Speaking of him, has anyone heard from Darby?

Joe's managing one my LPE satellite offices in the Caymans.

This is looking more and more like just another casualty of the drug war.

Sooner or later this war on drugs/terror is going to lead to a shooting war between the citizens and the government. Once the citizens realize they have nothing to lose the government is doomed.

LOL!

Eat it......?

Y'all wouldn't be laughing if you referred to them as "pants" ,or "britches" at MCRD in the 'sixties.A DI would "make an example" of you .

Marines wear TROUSERS !

I've refrained from getting involved in the snarling on this thread, for some odd reason... but referencing Bob's post, reading the articles, and reading the pertinent comments by my esteemed fellow Campfire members, it would appear that the situation was either:

1) an innocent, hard-working former Marine--which status conferred on him a degree of righteousness only slightly less than a saint--was illegally subjected to a SWAT team no-knock entry authorized by a suspicious and perhaps erroneous search warrant, and was then gunned down like a dog by multiple shooters without provocation, and everything the police did was immoral, illegal, and unconstitutional;

or, 2) SWAT executed a search warrant signed by a judge, entered the subject's home legally and according to established procedure, were met with armed resistance by the subject, who was then fired upon and neutralized, and following which the evidence of crime the police and prosecutors expected to find was in fact found, and seized.

or, 3) some version of events that lies somewhere in between these two extremes.

Until the dust settles and the inquiry is completed, all the fuss and bother is kind of a waste of bandwidth, don't you think?

Don't bother replying to this post. I'm not coming back to this one. It makes my keyboard feel dirty.

Shot 60 times to "neutralize"??? And the Marine didn't even fire on them??? Kinda like the famous Jeff O quote of "way over penetrate"...."way over neutralize"....

Shot 60 times to "neutralize"??? And the Marine didn't even fire on them???
=================

Yeah,SWAT and LEO always prefer the perp getting off a round or two beforehand....as a precaution,of course.

But don't you understand that all the cops went home at the end of their shift , which makes it a successful raid.

This may be the prototype for all future SWAT team actions ; Breakdown the door , empty your weapons into whoever you find inside , then run back out and agree on a storyline.

But 60 times??? dood...

You hit the nail square on the head.

In my world, a properly executed search warrant is a knock on the door, waiting for the door to be open and the search warrant being presented to whomever opens the door. Anything else is Gestapo tactics which is not warranted in a free society only a police state.

In your world,huh? Is that the same world as the one with faeries,dwarfs and goddesses or the one normal folks live in?

The offer for you to say whatever you want to my face, stands. Your call....

And, I still ain't wrong. The only thing you've ever done, and ever will do, is go from the broken end of one bottle to the next.

Rut roh.....

Contradictions are us....

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/crime/article_a978c23a-a40f-5d0a-a203-76b88ac67e86.html?mode=story

It's a good thing SWAT barged in when they did before the Marine could flush down the evidence (guns and body armor) they were looking for.

Quit taking counsel advocacy arguments and presenting it as if it's something out of the ordinary. I'll go with Storie's assertions right now as I am very well aware of why the multi-home/suspect search warrants were issued and why it's all under seal. The fact another home subject to a similar search warrant received a warning call from the dead man's home is quite telling.

Slow down FB before you're the brunt of some later harrassment. It's coming and it will be valid.

And another.



So a narcotics search warrant was served to find stuff that exists in most of the homes of Campfire posters? Well, 'cept the super secret piece of cop clothing, that wasn't damning enough to justify an arrest by their own admission....



Obviously the known super bad guy that has been surmised her.

Want to make a side wager that this will end up in settlement or a Judgment?

Foxbat , I think most 'fire members are obliged to you for posting these statements.Some things are just flat-assed WRONG on their face and this is one.

Yeah, really.

=============================

Being obliged to someone who can't see what's happening is a bed you can lay in after making it. You gals who voice emotion over reason in asserting your positions make me a rather wealthier man.Always have,always will. Keep up the good work.

Please carry on!

For More than just simple nuisance value with no admission of liabilty? Absolutely,name your price!

Surely an attorney knows the difference between "fact" and presumption...

It's you who should be practicing what you are feebly now trying to preach. I've seen this chain of events several times in my career and believe I know what's underneath all of this. Think outside the box and quit getting hung up on the narcotics.

Out of court settlements are generally not going to include an admission of liability, so no, we're not going to add that stumbling block to the wager.

Simple wager.

Settlement or judgment in favor of the family or administrative/criminal findings against the officers or their supervisors, I win.

No settlement, case dismissed without prejudice, no judgment in favor of the family and no criminal findings OR Administrative punishments against the officers or their supervisors.... you win.

While I admit that it wouldn't be wise to judge your opinions on things legal by the validity of your judgements pertaining to the gridiron , I'm going to keep an open mind as far as the dead guy's guilt is concerned rather than taking your word for it .

As far as the judgement and behaviour of the SWAT team , that's a closed case.

Forget it. A settlement for 5K to make them go away and you'll claim some sort of victory out of a chickenshit nuisance settlement. Go try that con with some of the other idiots.

So, did they ever find any drugs?

============

Clients with your frame of mind are by far my most favorite. My creditor's favorites, as well.

I'd say that answers that question.

I agree that a nuisance settlement is not an admission of liability, but you and I both know there is a good chance if there is a settlement, that they won't disclose the amount, so we wouldn't be able to ascertain who won.

Hey man....I'm just trying to help you out. After the facts play out,PM when you're ready to go public.

There's no doubt in my mind there will be a settlement of some sorts. I've seen insurance companies pay just to make the plaintiff go away. One of their lawyers explained it like this: It's far cheaper to pay 25K to a plaintiff then it is to go a jury trial for 5 days.

Or in a world where Tiger Woods is making his comeback tour???

With him being dead , his guilt or innocence can never be properly established [ or can they try dead folks in AZ ?] it seems that it will be the SWAT team on trial .

Based solely on facts not in question , I can't imagine a lawyer signing off on a 25K award.Not even 10 times that.

I'm just helping everyone out with the latest info.

The only bad guy so far IMO, is this 2 bit attorney, Storie, who apparently doesn't know to keep his mouth shut...cause he's not helping his clients.

SOME attorneys are like that...

Foxbat there are several reasons why people are not arrested after search warrants. If you think about it you will figure it out.

Dink

Storie??? You've got to be kidding. That two bit plaintiff hack is the one who hasn't learned to keep his mouth shut. He's violated several rules of dumbphuctitude as it is.

With him being dead , his guilt or innocence can never be properly established
================

Really?? You lay people crack me up.

I'm always open to enlightenment...

So tell me, in your professional opinion, what percentage of SWAT raids, serving narcotics warrants on single family residences, where all of the inhabitants were home, and resulting in the team finding "everything that they were looking for", would result in no arrests?

Keep in mind that the LEO's attorney said that had the family allowed the warrant team in, there would not have been any arrests.

That is a salient point for you to keep in mind, before you mention that dead perps can't be arrested.

Think outside the box,FB. That's twice I've cautioned you.

What, in hopes of trailing him to some better evidence? Weak.

Are you telling this lay person that a jury of his peers-which technically would be twelve dead citizens- can find the dead guy guilty of a crime ?

With Issac, you never really know WTF he's saying, I wonder if he forgot his MAO inhibiter some mornings and then I remember he's a lawyer.....

Here I would say at least %50 (probaly higher) of search warrants, for dope only, lead to no arrest at that time. Usually we only arrest people that already have arrest warrants and let everyone else loose. There are numerous reasons for this. I hate to post the reasons on a open forum but if you think about it you will figure it out.

Dink

We (my agency) serve lots of search warrants for evidence of engaging in organized criminal activity where the evidence sought, does not stand alone as cause to arrest.

I'll apologize in advance.....

Hung Jury?

George

===========

Because it's so much more fun reading the dumb clueless [bleep] like yourself who don't know schit.

==============

It's not what you asserted and yes,dead people's guilt of the commission of a crime can be established. Happens in trial with frequency.

His "peers" being 12 dead people is the epic ridiculousness that these threads always deteriorate to.

Only to the extent of establishing a reasonable doubt as to a living defendant's guilt, i.e., based on the evidence, the dead guy might have done it instead of the defendant.

Amazing,isn't it?? I guess the informant/inside guy the police are trying to keep from being murdered, before the affidavit evidence to be seized was tied together, escapes the girls who live their badass lives through CSI Miami reruns.

We've established the guilt of the SWAT team without a trial, why couldn't we establish the guilt of a dead guy WITH a trial.

LEO humor? George, you're, uhh, killing me.