GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-01-2012, 16:01   #41
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 45,570
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Why didn't the officers show up for the resisting arrest hearing? That will perhaps be answered in the response to the Complaint. I have this question. Did they agree with the detective's decision?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavionic View Post
This touches on a bigger issue that I will address in the end.
  • If he resisted arrest, is it common for officers to not show up at the hearing? In my area, the answer is no. However Philly - don't know.
The complaint states the Detective added the resisting arrest charge. My question is did the officers agree with that decision? Right now, we do not know that, but it deserves an answer.

What motion did Smith make that caused the officers to strike him initially? If the answer is none, fine, bad decision on the officers part. They were wrong. We do not have that information, do we? Do you?
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2012, 16:05   #42
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 45,570
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Another question, okay, questions comes to mind about his injuries. How long after December 14 did he seek treatment? When he sought treatment, what did he say caused his injuries? Did he tell the doctors and nurses he was beaten by the police?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavionic View Post
Not enough info to answer these.
Do you believe that information might be important in providing the totality of circumstances?
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2012, 16:23   #43
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 45,570
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavionic View Post
Here are the bigger issues, and perhaps Bren or you or others with experience in LE have rational answers.
  • If he confessed, why was he not convicted?
There is not enough information to say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavionic View Post
Here are the bigger issues, and perhaps Bren or you or others with experience in LE have rational answers.
  • And this is actually the one area that raises the most concern, what gave the officers the right to enter the young man's house? If officers show up at your house, say "this is our guy", and then start forcing their way into the house, would it be unusual for a person to react by being scared and try to retreat?
The question is what gave the officers the belief they had authority to enter the house.

Whether it would be unusual for a person to react by being scared and try to retreat would depend on the person and their circumstances. The test is would a reasonable person react that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavionic View Post
I have my doubts as to whether Mr. Smith is an angel here. However, I do have concerns that police MAY have acted inappropriately in how they handled this one.
You have concerns they MAY have acted inappropriately. You're a wuss. The statement should be: If the information in the parts of the complaint published in the linked article are true, the ***holes were way out of line, acted outside their authority and perhaps criminally.

If the information is false, is there a law against frivolous law suits.
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2012, 15:38   #44
jdavionic
NRA Member
 
jdavionic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Did you deliberately not respond to thisIf everything is true, their behavior is inexcusable. If one part is true, that part is inexcusable.

Now that we have that out of the way...
Uh...okay, we're in agreement, which should have been obvious from my other posts, and I didn't see that as soliciting a response from me.
__________________
- JD

"No matter how bad it gets, if you're still alive it's just another bad day."

Last edited by jdavionic; 04-02-2012 at 15:39..
jdavionic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2012, 15:44   #45
jdavionic
NRA Member
 
jdavionic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Whether it would be unusual for a person to react by being scared and try to retreat would depend on the person and their circumstances. The test is would a reasonable person react that way.
I think any reasonable person would be alarmed by the someone claiming to be police, saying 'this is our guy', and then forcing entry into your house.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP
You have concerns they MAY have acted inappropriately. You're a wuss. The statement should be: If the information in the parts of the complaint published in the linked article are true, the ***holes were way out of line, acted outside their authority and perhaps criminally.

If the information is false, is there a law against frivolous law suits.
Nice...name calling by a mod. The point is that there is doubt...hence the word "MAY". Obviously if I knew for certain that they beat this young man as alleged in the lawsuit (for example), then yes...they behaved as criminals, which is despicable and should be punished...as I cited in the OP. Same is true if they invaded his house outside the law.

Unlike what we've seen in the Tayvon case, I'm not willing to declare that they did or did not act inappropriately without seeing more facts in the case. If you deem that a "wuss", then you have issues.
__________________
- JD

"No matter how bad it gets, if you're still alive it's just another bad day."

Last edited by jdavionic; 04-02-2012 at 20:55..
jdavionic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2012, 15:52   #46
jdavionic
NRA Member
 
jdavionic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Do you believe that information might be important in providing the totality of circumstances?
Yes, it might be. Do you have information as to when he got medical attention?
__________________
- JD

"No matter how bad it gets, if you're still alive it's just another bad day."
jdavionic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2012, 19:45   #47
jdavionic
NRA Member
 
jdavionic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
What were the "suspect's actions?"
All we know is what the suspect alleges his actions were...which was to retreat after they made a forcible entry. Note, I'm not saying what the lawsuit cites is factual or not. Just saying that all we know on that question is that the suspect has made an allegation regarding how the events happened.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP
Why are a suspect's actions relative to a search of the house without a warrant?
This gets into the other post on the same subject...to some extent. Putting that aside (since there is a separate thread and we're discussing civil rights here), I don't know what the law says in the case of police making entry into a home without a warrant in a situation like this one where they believe they have identified a suspect. I would think they'd still need to get a warrant, but I don't know that for certain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP
What resistance did Mr. Smith make to the entry? Did they push him to gain entry? What did they do to make a forcible entry? What degree of force was used?
Again...is it unreasonable for a person to retreat given the circumstances? Whether or not he retreated immediately or pushed back on the door, does it matter...in other words, in either case...would entry still be a violation of his rights? I asked this questions earlier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP
Do you acknowledge you don't have all the facts in this matter?
I would have thought these posts would be clear to most people. However you seem hell bent on some personal attack, so I don't know any other way to respond other than to repost what I've already said -
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavionic
Do you have information as to when he got medical attention?
...clearly indicating that at least I don't have all the information here.

and another one...
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavionic
I don't know. I didn't find any either.
another...
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavionic
Not enough info to answer these.
and I could add more by the answers to your other questions as well.
__________________
- JD

"No matter how bad it gets, if you're still alive it's just another bad day."

Last edited by jdavionic; 04-02-2012 at 19:50..
jdavionic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2012, 20:08   #48
jdavionic
NRA Member
 
jdavionic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,479
Obviously if the allegations are true, the actions of the police here are despicable. And as I've already said, we don't know that's the case.

Putting that aside, consider this. Let's say that Smith stole those cell phones and the detective knows it. I'm not saying that's true...just a possible hypothetical to focus on one aspect.

So the detective and officers know Mr. Smith stole the cell phones, they approach his house...knock on his door...Smith opens, and the detective immediately recognizes him as 'the guy'. Whether the guy resists or not, they enter the house, arrest Mr. Smith, and confiscate cell phones. Violation of Mr. Smith's 4th Amendment rights or not?

Even if they saw a box of stolen cell phones sitting on his coffee table, wouldn't they simply use this observation as "probable cause" in getting a warrant? Or are there some actions / conditions that would allow them to enter his home anyway, arrest him, and conduct the search?
__________________
- JD

"No matter how bad it gets, if you're still alive it's just another bad day."

Last edited by jdavionic; 04-02-2012 at 20:09..
jdavionic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2012, 12:35   #49
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 45,570
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavionic View Post
Obviously if the allegations are true, the actions of the police here are despicable. And as I've already said, we don't know that's the case.

Putting that aside, consider this. Let's say that Smith stole those cell phones and the detective knows it. I'm not saying that's true...just a possible hypothetical to focus on one aspect.

So the detective and officers know Mr. Smith stole the cell phones, they approach his house...knock on his door...Smith opens, and the detective immediately recognizes him as 'the guy'. Whether the guy resists or not, they enter the house, arrest Mr. Smith, and confiscate cell phones. Violation of Mr. Smith's 4th Amendment rights or not?

Even if they saw a box of stolen cell phones sitting on his coffee table, wouldn't they simply use this observation as "probable cause" in getting a warrant? Or are there some actions / conditions that would allow them to enter his home anyway, arrest him, and conduct the search?
Hypothetically, if the detective knows Smith stole the phones, has proof he stole the phones, why would he not obtain the warrant.

Your hypothetical is not similar enough to the actual event. You added an absolute not in the original.

You are still fishing for someone to say absolutely that the police officers involved in the story you posted are guilty of violating the civil rights of Mr. Smith based on the "facts" you presented. You've agreed that we do not have all the facts. Absent those facts, you are not going to get anyone in law enforcement to give you that absolute affirmation you are seeking.
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2012, 13:06   #50
jdavionic
NRA Member
 
jdavionic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Hypothetically, if the detective knows Smith stole the phones, has proof he stole the phones, why would he not obtain the warrant.

Your hypothetical is not similar enough to the actual event. You added an absolute not in the original.

You are still fishing for someone to say absolutely that the police officers involved in the story you posted are guilty of violating the civil rights of Mr. Smith based on the "facts" you presented. You've agreed that we do not have all the facts. Absent those facts, you are not going to get anyone in law enforcement to give you that absolute affirmation you are seeking.
No sir, you're incorrect. I'm "fishing" to see if there are conditions / situations where police can enter a person's home without a warrant if a person has acted as I outlined. For example, a traffic stop and officers see drugs in the vehicle...they can and do make an arrest. I don't know if some states have a similar method of handling a similar situation like the one that Mr. Smith was involved. In other words, IF police confirm that a person is in the home that police are seeking for a crime and the suspect has opened the door, can the police give chase into the home? IF police see stolen property and the chief suspect in a home and the suspect opens the door and then tries to flee, can the police enter the home in pursuit?

If the answers are "yes", then this is a possible explanation and another fact to consider when assessing whether they acted appropriately. If the answers are "no, you must have warrant", then I would not see any way where the police acted appropriately with respect to entering the home.
__________________
- JD

"No matter how bad it gets, if you're still alive it's just another bad day."
jdavionic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2012, 13:15   #51
jdavionic
NRA Member
 
jdavionic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,479
Funny, I found this article on LegalZoom.com. It touches on what I was getting at.
http://www.legalzoom.com/everyday-law/home-leisure/can-police-search-your

According to the article, there are 4 circumstances where no warrant is required:
1. Consent - the person in control of the property grants consent to search the premises.

2. Plain view - this is why I was mentioning the possibility that perhaps they could see evidence of the crime.

3. Search incident to arrest - not sure this one applies here. The police arrived at the home to investigate a crime. At least according to the lawsuit, they did not arrive to arrest Mr. Smith (although that was the result).

4. Exigent circumstances - where evidence could be destroyed or public danger could be a concern if they do not immediately enter. I don't see this being applicable here.
__________________
- JD

"No matter how bad it gets, if you're still alive it's just another bad day."

Last edited by jdavionic; 04-03-2012 at 13:26..
jdavionic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2012, 13:49   #52
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 45,570
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavionic View Post
No sir, you're incorrect. I'm "fishing" to see if there are conditions / situations where police can enter a person's home without a warrant if a person has acted as I outlined. For example, a traffic stop and officers see drugs in the vehicle...they can and do make an arrest. I don't know if some states have a similar method of handling a similar situation like the one that Mr. Smith was involved. In other words, IF police confirm that a person is in the home that police are seeking for a crime and the suspect has opened the door, can the police give chase into the home? IF police see stolen property and the chief suspect in a home and the suspect opens the door and then tries to flee, can the police enter the home in pursuit?

If the answers are "yes", then this is a possible explanation and another fact to consider when assessing whether they acted appropriately. If the answers are "no, you must have warrant", then I would not see any way where the police acted appropriately with respect to entering the home.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavionic View Post
Funny, I found this article on LegalZoom.com. It touches on what I was getting at.
http://www.legalzoom.com/everyday-law/home-leisure/can-police-search-your

According to the article, there are 4 circumstances where no warrant is required:
1. Consent - the person in control of the property grants consent to search the premises.

2. Plain view - this is why I was mentioning the possibility that perhaps they could see evidence of the crime.

3. Search incident to arrest - not sure this one applies here. The police arrived at the home to investigate a crime. At least according to the lawsuit, they did not arrive to arrest Mr. Smith (although that was the result).

4. Exigent circumstances - where evidence could be destroyed or public danger could be a concern if they do not immediately enter. I don't see this being applicable here.
You've answered your own question.
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2012, 13:56   #53
jdavionic
NRA Member
 
jdavionic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
You've answered your own question.
Yes.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________
- JD

"No matter how bad it gets, if you're still alive it's just another bad day."
jdavionic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2012, 15:01   #54
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 45,570
Blog Entries: 64
Good!!
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2012, 16:07   #55
jdavionic
NRA Member
 
jdavionic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Good!!
Yes it is. Perhaps this is common knowledge for many people, but it was news to me. I had a suspicion, which I eluded to earlier. But I didn't know for certain.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________
- JD

"No matter how bad it gets, if you're still alive it's just another bad day."
jdavionic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2012, 18:26   #56
Mister_Beefy
Legal & Proper
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post
If you think that's a "straw man argument" you need to study what a straw man argument is a little more.
I know that's not a straw man argument.

I was anticipating the inevitable straw man argument claim that I always receive, but is never substantiated.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post
A conclusion without a fact basis is pretty much the definition of "untrue".
page 195 of bren's "internet forum rule book"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post

I CLEARLY did not say it doesn't exist - I even discussed when it does exist. That none of my clients have ever lost in court or been found to have engaged in misconduct doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I know cops who have engaged in misconduct, gone to prison, been fired, etc.
ah, so you agree with me.

very good.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
He agreed with you...that's weak?
had he agreed with me, he would have said something like "you are correct, police misconduct happens every day"

then possibly added something like

"and we do everything we can to combat it and bring those perpetrators to justice."

but no, he said

"What makes what you said untrue is that you have no direct knowledge of police and their conduct, so you have no basis for your statement."



Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
And here comes your inflammatory trolling statement.To refute Bren's contention about your knowledge, please answer these questions:
truth you disagree with turns into trolling with a wave of your moderator wand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Can you cite 365 cases of misconduct committed over 365 consecutive days that were successfully prosecuted? If yes, please do so.

heh, so if I say anything on an internet forum, I have to prove it with verifiable accounts from a court of record.

got it.
Mister_Beefy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2012, 17:31   #57
Kingarthurhk
Isaiah 53:4-9
 
Kingarthurhk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,575
Mr. Beefy, you are to law enforcement as Norske is to religion.

It might be easier if you just developed a macro to copy paste that LEO's are bad repeatedly, and never even have to enjoin the topic.

It is about all you add to such topics anyway.
__________________
Glock 17, 19, 20SF, 21C, 22, 26, 27, Glock E-Tool, Glock knife
Quod ego haereticus appellari sequere Jesum.
Kingarthurhk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2012, 20:32   #58
Mister_Beefy
Legal & Proper
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk View Post
Mr. Beefy, you are to law enforcement as Norske is to religion.

It might be easier if you just developed a macro to copy paste that LEO's are bad repeatedly, and never even have to enjoin the topic.

It is about all you add to such topics anyway.
oh really?

that's the most pertinint thing you have to say, eh?

sounds so familiar.......

oh yeah, I remember!


Quote:
Originally Posted by TheeBadOne View Post


if you cannot attack the argument, attack the poster. The classic sign of a defeated argument.
Mister_Beefy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2012, 16:18   #59
OldCurlyWolf
Senior Member
 
OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 751
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavionic View Post
Yes it is. Perhaps this is common knowledge for many people, but it was news to me. I had a suspicion, which I eluded to earlier. But I didn't know for certain.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Not to be the grammar police but this one tickled my funny bone.

How did you escape your suspicion??

I believe the actual word you wanted was the word "Alluded", not "Eluded".

__________________
I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)

Last edited by OldCurlyWolf; 04-09-2012 at 16:19..
OldCurlyWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2012, 16:21   #60
jdavionic
NRA Member
 
jdavionic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldCurlyWolf View Post
Not to be the grammar police but this one tickled my funny bone.

How did you escape your suspicion??

I believe the actual word you wanted was the word "Alluded", not "Eluded".

Okay, it was not easy. That is funny. Busted.
__________________
- JD

"No matter how bad it gets, if you're still alive it's just another bad day."
jdavionic is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:50.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 979
318 Members
661 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31