You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
An incident I heard about on the radio
- Thread starter Doug.38PR
- Start date
Blackwater OPS
New member
Friday March 24 6:32 PM ET
Scandals Spotlight Denver Police
By ROBERT WELLER, Associated Press Writer
DENVER (AP) - This week, the city paid $400,000 to the family of a man killed in a raid at the wrong house, and was fined $10,000 by a federal judge for failing to cooperate with a police brutality investigation, and swore in a new cop who admitted he once used cocaine and LSD.
Last month Police Chief Tom Sanchez was ousted in the fallout from the SWAT raid.
On Sept. 29, Ismael Mena, 45, was shot to death after officers broke into his bedroom in a so-called ``no-knock'' raid on the wrong house. Police said he threatened them with a gun.
Two police officers were cleared of wrongdoing. Officer Joseph Bini, who requested the raid, is charged with perjury for allegedly lying when he said he saw an informant going into Mena's house to get cocaine. The correct target was a suspected drug house next door.
The shooting prompted a public outcry over no-knock raids. A panel assembled by the mayor is considering a temporary ban.
City officials have agreed to pay $400,000[TAXPAYER MONEY!!!-ops] to Mena's family to settle claims stemming from his death. Sanchez was forced to step down as police chief after Bini was charged Feb. 4.
Cops Raid Wrong House, Man Dies
Houston Chronicle Date: FRI 07/17/98
Section: A Page: 1 Edition: 3 STAR
Cops may have had right to shoot /DA speaks about deadly home raid
By RAD SALLEE, JO ANN ZUNIGA, S.K. BARDWELL
Staff
Harris County District Attorney John B. Holmes Jr. said Thursday that the six Houston police officers involved in a Sunday raid in which a man was killed could have been within their rights to shoot him - even if they had no right to be in his home.
"I don't know of any authority at this point that gave them the right to be in that residence," Holmes said. "But that doesn't make the shooting a crime."
[Either the officers had authority to enter the residence or they didn't. If they did not, then their shooting a man in his own home amounts to homicide. What's so hard about that? Or hasn't Mr. Holmes ever heard of the Fourth Amendment?]
The six suspended officers, assigned to the gang task force at the Southwest patrol division, reportedly fired about 30 shots after breaking into Pedro Oregon Navarro's apartment at 6711 Atwell at 1:30 a.m. Sunday in southwest Houston.
Relatives of Oregon, 23, who died from multiple bullet wounds, have retained attorney Paul Nugent to investigate his death. Nugent said family members told him that even after Oregon was shot, the officers tried to bully them into saying he had been dealing drugs. He said they had denied it. Police acknowledged that no drugs were found in the apartment.
"Pedro was a father, soccer player and landscape worker," Nugent said. "What we have here is a good kid from a good family."
Holmes said that because the law [in Texas] does not allow anyone to resist an arrest, even an illegal one, officers had a right to use deadly force against Oregon if he threatened them. A pistol was found at the scene, but police have not yet said if it had been fired. "They do not have to sit still for a citizen pointing a firearm at them, even if they entered unlawfully," Holmes said.
"They were - every one of them - in uniform," he said. "There should not be any reasonable idea in your mind that you are being the victim of a kick burglary."
[Apparently Mr. Holmes believes citizens must first ascertain if its a criminal or police smashing down the door before reaching for a firearm or weapon. He also seems to think it's the citizen's fault if he hears his front door crash in and he responds with a revolver to defend his family.]
Holmes said Texas law at one time had recognized a person's right to resist an unlawful arrest. But since the mid-1970s, the law had required that everyone submit to arrest, even in their homes. The only exception, Holmes said, is the right to defend yourself against unreasonable force, such as being beaten.
Holmes said his investigation is continuing, along with those of the Police Department's homicide and internal affairs divisions.
The officers, who had no search or arrest warrant, have told investigators they raided the place after a confidential informant told them he had witnessed a drug transaction there. A source told the Chronicle that the tipster was not registered with HPD, as is required of all police informants. Holmes said the tipster had just been arrested and was trying to "make a deal" with officers. Holmes said that violates the policy of his office, and any such deal would not be honored by prosecutors and would not stand up in court.
Even if a reliable informant had seen drugs sold in the house, Holmes said, officers would have to get a warrant from a judge before breaking in.
Although there are some circumstances that justify warrantless entry - hot pursuit, for instance - Holmes said he knows of none that applies in this case. "There are damn few exceptions to searching someone's private residence," he said.
"If the informant got in and was wired (with a recording device) and the officers heard someone say `I'm gonna blow you away,' then they could go in," Holmes said.
Nugent said the family contacted his firm - Foreman, DeGeurin, Gerger & Nugent - "because they were being besieged by police." He added, "They thought they were being treated unfairly and were being bullied."
He conceded that Oregon may have had the weapon, for self-protection. "But there is nothing wrong in having a gun in your home. There is a legal process in America even for police officers. You don't just barge in and start shooting people," Nugent said.
Scandals Spotlight Denver Police
By ROBERT WELLER, Associated Press Writer
DENVER (AP) - This week, the city paid $400,000 to the family of a man killed in a raid at the wrong house, and was fined $10,000 by a federal judge for failing to cooperate with a police brutality investigation, and swore in a new cop who admitted he once used cocaine and LSD.
Last month Police Chief Tom Sanchez was ousted in the fallout from the SWAT raid.
On Sept. 29, Ismael Mena, 45, was shot to death after officers broke into his bedroom in a so-called ``no-knock'' raid on the wrong house. Police said he threatened them with a gun.
Two police officers were cleared of wrongdoing. Officer Joseph Bini, who requested the raid, is charged with perjury for allegedly lying when he said he saw an informant going into Mena's house to get cocaine. The correct target was a suspected drug house next door.
The shooting prompted a public outcry over no-knock raids. A panel assembled by the mayor is considering a temporary ban.
City officials have agreed to pay $400,000[TAXPAYER MONEY!!!-ops] to Mena's family to settle claims stemming from his death. Sanchez was forced to step down as police chief after Bini was charged Feb. 4.
Cops Raid Wrong House, Man Dies
Houston Chronicle Date: FRI 07/17/98
Section: A Page: 1 Edition: 3 STAR
Cops may have had right to shoot /DA speaks about deadly home raid
By RAD SALLEE, JO ANN ZUNIGA, S.K. BARDWELL
Staff
Harris County District Attorney John B. Holmes Jr. said Thursday that the six Houston police officers involved in a Sunday raid in which a man was killed could have been within their rights to shoot him - even if they had no right to be in his home.
"I don't know of any authority at this point that gave them the right to be in that residence," Holmes said. "But that doesn't make the shooting a crime."
[Either the officers had authority to enter the residence or they didn't. If they did not, then their shooting a man in his own home amounts to homicide. What's so hard about that? Or hasn't Mr. Holmes ever heard of the Fourth Amendment?]
The six suspended officers, assigned to the gang task force at the Southwest patrol division, reportedly fired about 30 shots after breaking into Pedro Oregon Navarro's apartment at 6711 Atwell at 1:30 a.m. Sunday in southwest Houston.
Relatives of Oregon, 23, who died from multiple bullet wounds, have retained attorney Paul Nugent to investigate his death. Nugent said family members told him that even after Oregon was shot, the officers tried to bully them into saying he had been dealing drugs. He said they had denied it. Police acknowledged that no drugs were found in the apartment.
"Pedro was a father, soccer player and landscape worker," Nugent said. "What we have here is a good kid from a good family."
Holmes said that because the law [in Texas] does not allow anyone to resist an arrest, even an illegal one, officers had a right to use deadly force against Oregon if he threatened them. A pistol was found at the scene, but police have not yet said if it had been fired. "They do not have to sit still for a citizen pointing a firearm at them, even if they entered unlawfully," Holmes said.
"They were - every one of them - in uniform," he said. "There should not be any reasonable idea in your mind that you are being the victim of a kick burglary."
[Apparently Mr. Holmes believes citizens must first ascertain if its a criminal or police smashing down the door before reaching for a firearm or weapon. He also seems to think it's the citizen's fault if he hears his front door crash in and he responds with a revolver to defend his family.]
Holmes said Texas law at one time had recognized a person's right to resist an unlawful arrest. But since the mid-1970s, the law had required that everyone submit to arrest, even in their homes. The only exception, Holmes said, is the right to defend yourself against unreasonable force, such as being beaten.
Holmes said his investigation is continuing, along with those of the Police Department's homicide and internal affairs divisions.
The officers, who had no search or arrest warrant, have told investigators they raided the place after a confidential informant told them he had witnessed a drug transaction there. A source told the Chronicle that the tipster was not registered with HPD, as is required of all police informants. Holmes said the tipster had just been arrested and was trying to "make a deal" with officers. Holmes said that violates the policy of his office, and any such deal would not be honored by prosecutors and would not stand up in court.
Even if a reliable informant had seen drugs sold in the house, Holmes said, officers would have to get a warrant from a judge before breaking in.
Although there are some circumstances that justify warrantless entry - hot pursuit, for instance - Holmes said he knows of none that applies in this case. "There are damn few exceptions to searching someone's private residence," he said.
"If the informant got in and was wired (with a recording device) and the officers heard someone say `I'm gonna blow you away,' then they could go in," Holmes said.
Nugent said the family contacted his firm - Foreman, DeGeurin, Gerger & Nugent - "because they were being besieged by police." He added, "They thought they were being treated unfairly and were being bullied."
He conceded that Oregon may have had the weapon, for self-protection. "But there is nothing wrong in having a gun in your home. There is a legal process in America even for police officers. You don't just barge in and start shooting people," Nugent said.
I think the point is, you can't just up and shoot someone that wakes you from a deep sleep because you don't know if it's a real threat or not. You may shoot a spouse, child, or police officer. Yes the situation would make anyone madder then hell, but there are laws and does anyone really want to spend the time and money to defend themselves, and possibly go to jail for life, because they didn't think first? There will be a lot of false bravado in the forum about better being alive and all that BS, but when you lose all your assets and are behind bars with the criminals you were armed against, how fun would that be???? Whoever said to arm but not shoot and call 911 if possible has the best defensible chance in court after the incident is over. Besides, if you were asleep the intruder has the drop on you anyway, if he meant to harm you ant false move gets you killed. And killed is forever!
Regarding the right of self defense against even police, I was JUST watching Fox news talking about the man in NO who was beaten by police (whether wrongly or not). The question that we have been discussing in this thread was raised: Do you have a right to defend yourself against police if you are wrongfully arrested?
according to fox legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,2155,00.html there is only ONE state in the Union that you can LEGALLY defend yourself against police assulting you and that happens to be my state of Texas (also the state in which the radio incident at the top of the threat took place in)
Napolitano said of course that in other states jurys can take into account if the police were wrong or something and hence nullify the law using jury nullification but as far as the way the LAW reads, in other states you have no right to defend yourself against police if you are being beaten or raped or whatever even if you know you are in the right and they are absolutely in the wrong...as evil as that is.
Of course I just got through reading the account of dipstick Mr. Holmes as quoted in an above thread.
according to fox legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,2155,00.html there is only ONE state in the Union that you can LEGALLY defend yourself against police assulting you and that happens to be my state of Texas (also the state in which the radio incident at the top of the threat took place in)
Napolitano said of course that in other states jurys can take into account if the police were wrong or something and hence nullify the law using jury nullification but as far as the way the LAW reads, in other states you have no right to defend yourself against police if you are being beaten or raped or whatever even if you know you are in the right and they are absolutely in the wrong...as evil as that is.
Of course I just got through reading the account of dipstick Mr. Holmes as quoted in an above thread.
Clinot said:Originally Posted by blackmind
"Now, say this cop is raping a woman after placing her (wrongly) in custody. Who here wants to maintain that once a cop is raping her, the woman still may not defend herself with lethal force?!"
Could you elaborate on this?
Um, no, not without you first explaining what about it needs elaboration. I think it's pretty clear.
-blackmind
Harris County District Attorney John B. Holmes Jr. said Thursday that the six Houston police officers involved in a Sunday raid in which a man was killed could have been within their rights to shoot him - even if they had no right to be in his home.
"I don't know of any authority at this point that gave them the right to be in that residence," Holmes said. "But that doesn't make the shooting a crime."
[Either the officers had authority to enter the residence or they didn't. If they did not, then their shooting a man in his own home amounts to homicide. What's so hard about that? Or hasn't Mr. Holmes ever heard of the Fourth Amendment?]
If I were burglarizing a guy's house and he came out of his bedroom to find me standing in his hallway with loot, and he points a gun at me, I AM NOT PROTECTED BY LAWS THAT ENTITLE ME TO SELF DEFENSE, since I am committing a crime!
Police entering a house by force, when that house is NOT the one subject to the warrant, are committing a crime and therefore they should have no protection under self-defense laws if the occupant draws and/or fires on them.
The same should hold true if they do have a warrant, but the reason for the warrant's issue is fraudulent. (My reasoning is, they will then be busting in on an innocent man who has little or no reason to think the cops will be a-callin', and he can be excused for the reasonable reaction of defending his life and home while thinking he is the victim of a home-invasion robbery.)
The bottom line is that the police court disaster when they execute (pun?) no-knock warrants. In sports it's called "drawing the foul," is it not? They do something that is wrong, or very near the line, and cause a person to do something that then justifies killing him. That's just plain intolerably wrong.
-blackmind