Another no-knock warrant and cover up

If you live, and are COMPLETELY INNOCENT of the reason for the no-knock, do you still go to prison for ever for that LEO you killed by mistake?

Been a while since I read up on the subject, but I'm pretty sure you do...or at least can. And that a couple people have.

Even in states with relatively unrestrictive home defense laws, you are generally not allowed to use force against an LEO who is in the performance of his duties. Which, of course, makes sense at first glance. But when you factor in no-knock or kinda-sorta-knock raids, I believe it's generally on you to prove that you didn't know they were cops at the time.
 
Collectivist Crap.

"before some accept the fact that there are people involved in things that are not in the best interest of the rest of us. "

So.......... because someone MIGHT be doing something that is not in the best interest of the rest of us, we should have para-military police break down their doors and shoot them 5 times?

Careful there, Fritz. Next, you'll have the .gov rounding up smokers and putting them in camps. THEY are DEFINITELY doing something that is "not in the best interest of the rest of us". It is that kind of Collectivist crap that makes me wonder if our county has actually been flushed, as opposed to "just circling the bowl".....................

When in doubt, err on the side of Liberty.
 
That article is riddled with misconceptions, misleading statements, invalid judgments, and basic innuendo.

It is not worth the paper it was written on, if it ever was on paper.

Judgments like "He reached for a broken gun, a pretty clear indication that he had no intention of killing anyone, but rather was trying to scare away the intruders." How would anyone the gun was pointed at know it was broken? And exactly what constitutes a "broken" gun?

It tries to make a big deal out of only the address being mentioned in the warrant but that is very common for rental properties being used a crack houses since police have no idea who is truly inside.

It makes statements about how the neighbor was coerced into changing his story but admits it never actually got either story from him directly.

And this isn't a case of "wrong address, wrong person." He was actually charged with a crime other than just confronting police with a firearm. The whole story of his sister storing these common crack related items at his house is pretty far out there.

It also states he was never involved in anything drug related but in the same sentence says he has had multiple DWI's. DWI is a drug related charge...be that drug alcohol, prescription medication, or illegal drugs.

You would really have to be fishing and willing to ignore a lot of things to give this article much credibility.
 
the cops and legal system seems completely wrong. I know jewelry makers and they have scales. it seems like this thread is another example of TFL members saying "guilty until proven innocent".

When will people here understand that concept or, "There go I, but for the grace of God."
 
the cops and legal system seems completely wrong. I know jewelry makers and they have scales. it seems like this thread is another example of TFL members saying "guilty until proven innocent".
I make jewelry also, and I do have a scale. Not one large enough to be used for drug purposes though, and I certainly do not store it at my brother's house.

Also, no one said anything about this guy being guilty or innocent. We all pointed out how bad this article is and how apparent is it's bias. It is poorly vetted, poorly written, and either written by an incompetent or downright deliberately misleading.
 
Asleep in his bed when the window directly opposite came crashing in, Ingle's first instinct was to reach for the pistol he kept by his bedside — a cheap Lorcin automatic. Having never been convicted of a felony, it was perfectly legal for him to have the gun; perfectly legal for him to use it to defend his home against intruders. He had bought it a few years before, he said, because of how bad the neighborhood had gotten. His house had been broken into in the past. A few months before, at a store only a few blocks away on Main Street, a robbery had turned into a shootout, and two people had been killed. Even so, Ingle couldn't have shot anyone with the gun even if he'd wanted to. Years before, someone had pounded the wrong clip into the gun and jammed something inside. Ingle and his foster brother, Eric Nelson, say it couldn't even chamber a round, much less fire.

A second after he sat up, Ingle said, the room “kind of filled up with light,” and he could see the officers outside the window, in their black helmets and body armor. “I could see that they weren't robbers, so I threw the gun down,” Ingle said. “A second later, I heard one of the police officers say, ‘He's got a ****ing gun'… I could hear him turning in the leaves, and as soon as he turned, he turned around and started shooting.”

This is where Ingle's story and that of the two officers involved diverge. The officers, identified only as “Victim 1” and “Victim 2” in a NLRPD investigation report concerning the shooting, both told investigators that Ingle was sitting up and bed and pointing the gun in their faces when they raked away the sheet covering the window, giving them no choice but to open fire. Ingle, meanwhile, says that the gun was already on the floor, and he was in the process of raising his hands when the shooting started.

Whatever the case, the first shot that hit Tracy Ingle was devastating — most likely a high-velocity .223 round, given the damage it inflicted. The bullet entered Ingle's leg just above the left kneecap and blew his thigh apart. Surgeons would later replace a large chunk of Ingle's femur with a stainless steel rod.

He knew he had been shot, Ingle said, and his first instinct was to try to get off the bed — away from the window, at least, where the two officers were now pouring fire into the room. As Ingle tried, he got tangled up in the blankets and his ruined leg folded under him, the shattered bone grating inside. He fell to the floor in agony. As he fell, the officers outside the window kept shooting, hitting him four more times — arm, calf, hip and chest. The round that hit him in the chest is still there, too close to his heart to be removed. Days later, Ingle's brother, Eric, would dig four more bullets out of a space heater that was only a foot from where Ingle's head lay, and spackle up nine bullet holes in the wall over Tracy's bed. Some of those rounds had gone completely through and into the bathroom on the other side of the wall, two of them blowing ragged holes through both sides of a plywood shelf.


I suggest you read the original article linked by the OP information differs from what is being discussed here, and it doesnt look good for the police.

They turned this guys house inside out, and found, No DRUGS AND NO DRUG RESIDUE.
 
I suggest you read the original article linked by the OP information differs from what is being discussed here, and it doesnt look good for the police.

They turned this guys house inside out, and found, No DRUGS AND NO DRUG RESIDUE.

Some people don't allow facts to get in the way of the proclamation of another man's guilt.
 
Actually, that second article is even worse. It reads like it was written by a failed action/adventure writer.

"the first shot that hit Tracy Ingle was devastating — most likely a high-velocity .223 round"

"blew his thigh apart."

"his ruined leg folded under him, the shattered bone grating inside."

"pouring fire into the room."

"He fell to the floor in agony. "
 
AlleyKat, so lets say you are laying in bed asleep, when you are awakened by tremendous amounts of noise, breaking doors, glass, ect, of SOMEONE forcefully entering your home.


Not likely to happen to me. I don't have a sister in the jewelry business!:cool:
 
Quote:
AlleyKat, so lets say you are laying in bed asleep, when you are awakened by tremendous amounts of noise, breaking doors, glass, ect, of SOMEONE forcefully entering your home.

Not likely to happen to me. I don't have a sister in the jewelry business!

Now thats just lame. Its a valid question about the inherent danger of a no-knock type scenario, and thats all you've got? You are implying that you believe the victim here was doing something illegal, yet according to the stories, no drugs or any evidence of drugs were found.

I admit the story is pretty flimsy to make an argument either way, but we CAN argue about the danger of this type of scenario, which could easily happen to anyone. I mean, who doesn't have sandwich baggies in their cabinet.....:rolleyes:
 
THAT is just it. Exactly.

I admit the story is pretty flimsy to make an argument either way, but we CAN argue about the danger of this type of scenario, which could easily happen to anyone. I mean, who doesn't have sandwich baggies in their cabinet.....

In THIS country, we are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, by a jury of our peers......... Not by some hotshot paramilitary cops running around with assault rifles and a template for a search warrant. You think this guy is doing something naughty? Arrest him on the street, and do your search of his residence. Breaking down his door and shooting him through his bedroom window smacks of Central American death squad antics of the 1980's.. the only difference is that they did not finish the job.........
 
bottom line

only a fool points a non-functioning firearm at an intruder. Had it been an actual intruder this fool would probably been killed by the BG. :cool:
 
Anyone who has ever had the misfortune to actually handle a Lorcin .25 knows what a piece of crap they are. I think they are "broken" by their very design.

That said, the problem is that this could have happened in a better way, so that the danger was lessened and nothing like this happened. But the police have to keep those high strung assault units trained and sharp SOMEHOW. :rolleyes:

MISSED POINT: ANYONE wakened in this fashion could mistake LEO for BG, and could either end up dead, or accidentally killing or wounding a LEO. It is a STUPID RISK TO TAKE, and should only be used in the most drastic of circumstances. Too big of a margin for error on either side. BUT, any citizen, even if completely innocent, (and I'm not saying this guy is) who accidentally shoots a LEO is DONE, COOKED, LIFE OVER. Even if the LEO's themselves caused the shooting by assaulting the home of a sleeping man, and scaring them out of their wits. If an innocent man has the audacity to defend his life against a LEO, even if he has no idea this is a LEO at the time, might as well get shot, as his life as he knows it is through either way.

Bad judgment on part of Leo Assault Squad. :o
 
...not to mention how often LEO are becoming more and more inhumane as time goes on...

I'd love to see one of those uber tactical buttheads get a serving of what they dish out.

Let's see how it would go if a dept. made a mistake and crashed into one of it's own members homes by mistake.

Who gets blamed if someone dies?

Is it the sleeping cop who defended his home and life or is it the goon squad who screwed up from the start?
 
Back
Top