Home invasions by police. Smart idea?

>I am assuming that a reasonable person with nothing to hide would answer my call.<

Kinda ignores

>announce again, but don't enter, and see a male upstairs run into another room. He neither looked at officers nor responded in any way.<

As a general rule, people will at least LOOK at where an unexpected noise comes from, so my armchair-commando first thought is "maybe a deaf person". Would I think of that as a cop on the scene? I kinda doubt it...
 
As a general rule, people will at least LOOK at where an unexpected noise comes from, so my armchair-commando first thought is "maybe a deaf person". Would I think of that as a cop on the scene? I kinda doubt it...
Click to expand...
Wrong HR! Things like that, along with things like...

How do you know the tenants of this apartment have not changed? The lady who reported those domestic disputes could now be living in another state. How do you know the man you saw run is not the retarded son of the new homeowner who is simply spooked anytime the doorbell rings? How do you know this is not a lure to kill a couple of cops as a gang initiation?
Click to expand...
...are all possible, and MUST be considered, but there are times when some of these questions simply have no available answer.

With all due respect, a 911 hangup is not the same as suspecting a home to be harboring a fugitive or drugs.

The 911 hangup is potentially a crime in progress.

The harbored fugitive is simply someone who might commit or has committed a crime. The drugs are simply a storehouse of a controlled substance.

These are not the same.
Click to expand...
Agreed XB, but a "home invasion" is still being contemplated, no?
 
Hopefully CPT's police dept would have some kind of policy on this and I was awake listening in class. My primary concern would be the safety of everyone inside. That would be the overiding factor for me in this situation.

In my military experience you do not always have answers to every question. You do not have all the information. That where experience comes in. Sometimes you can not wait for a person in a higher pay grade to make a decision. I have had to to do it. Some were not happy campers about everything I did, but by following established policy I never got in trouble about it.
 
Eghad-
Military is FAR different from the Police. In the first place, the Military rewards initiative, so long as it occurs within the framework of Mission Goal and UCJ; in the second, the recipients of Military attention are generally not represented by US Civil Attorneys.

So, when we have identical scenarios, one Military and one Law Enforcement:
- The soldier is judged by his own and, short of a rather narrow range of behaviors, is given the benefit of the doubt.
- The LEO, however, is constrained by all manner of law, much of which may not even be "settled" at the time his decision must be made; everyone in the neighborhood has a camcorder; the recipient of his attentions has (or will have) a lawyer and access to Judicial redress; the recipient of his attentions has a much broader set of enforceable rights than those in a Soldier's War Zone; and the LEO is likely to be judged, not by his own, but by a jury of his peers.

All that is as it should be; but one can hardly equate a Soldier's dilemma with an LEO's. One is not "easier" than the other; but in the instant case they're quite different.
Rich
 
Hopefully CPT's police dept would have some kind of policy on this and I was awake listening in class.
Click to expand...
Sound policy certainly helps, but sound policy should rarely be absolute. There should be a lot of "should"'s and "should not"'s, and few "will"'s and "will not"'s. We learned this the hard way with a previous chief that liked to micro-manage with little real-life experience. No policy adequately covers all situations, all the time.

In my military experience you do not always have answers to every question. You do not have all the information. That where experience comes in. Sometimes you can not wait for a person in a higher pay grade to make a decision.
Click to expand...
Anyone who's worked on a smaller department, where there are no city attorneys on call 24/7, and a judge is off somewhere playing golf, knows that the buck stops with the cop. The supervisor or senior officer, who is not an attorney, nor a specialist in constitutional case law, is forced to make the decision, for better or for worse. We do the best that we can, but it's often a "best guess".

The bad thing about scenarios like I posted is that readers aren't privy to all the nuances, i.e., every little sight, sound, smell, etc., that those actually on scene have, and those all have a bearing on decisions. Never the less, we rarely have the whole picture, either. This is what I'm trying to get across to those that think everything's cut, dried, and simplified, and that a "home invasion" by police has no place, at no time, no way.

As to the decisions actually made, and the outcome of our incident... I'd like to see what a few more members would do before I end the suspense :D .
 
Rich,

I wasnt making a comparison. My point is that you never have all the answers you want for some situations. Did not meant to go overboard nor make a comparison between the two. CPT Charlie asked a question and I answered it to the best of my civilian ability.

You have never heard of press on the battlefield? They even trained us on how to handle that these days. Abu Gharib started because of pictures and video. Even in the military we have been painfully made aware of the advent of the video and digital age and the Internet. We even get cultural training. I imagine in the future some civilian security contractors may be made painfully aware of the digital age. I was aware of the fact that even though I was in a foriegn country I was a represenative of this nation and that any actions that were out of line could be captured on video or pictures and be posted on the Internet :eek:

The answer to that in law enforcment and the military is do your duty by the set of rules making the best decision you can at the time.

We are also constrained by the Law of Land Warfare, the UCMJ, and the Rules of Engagement and some leaders who will make you the sacrificial lamb when times get tough.

We are not trained for civilian law enforcment. While no expert I have started a class this semster in Fundamentals of Criminal law and Terrorism Law. Believe me when I say I have compassion for our Law Enforcment Officers who have to keep this stuff in mind everday.

Yes we will get a jury of military soldiers. Sometimes those wearing Stars also have a political agenda or the administration may have a PC Menu which may effect how justice is administered.

http://www.sftt.org/main.cfm?action...rchives=defense&htmlId=4627&HtmlCategoryID=30

Here we have a Warrant Officer who was given what I consider to have been let off the hook too easy for negligent homicide. Then you have the enlisted soldiers at Abu Gharib who were sentenced to long prison terms. I didnt feel sorry for either one, we all are capable of making the right choice.

So military justice is just as bumpy as out there in the real world and driven by political and PC agendas of those perfumed princes of the military and politicians.

Yes the two missions of law enforcment and military are different. However both share the dilemma of having to make decisons without all the information you want. Which means you will have to fall back on experience, being familiar with departmental policy, regulations and the law. That is the point I was trying to make.

If I were familiar with the CPT's departmental policies and regulations and had some experience in his department under his mentorship my decision might be different???????
 
CPT Charlie while reviewing cases in classes of law our instructor ( a retired law enforcment officer) makes it a point to include facts that you dont see in the case brief that are related to the incident.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top