Police Strike Innocents Again!!

CassidyGT

New member
Damnation!!!! I am so sick and tired of this bullsh!t going on!!! I have HAD IT!!!

http://www.sunspot.net/content/cover/story?section=cover&pagename=story&storyid=1 150460205606

City police should come clean about groundless raids
Gregory Kane
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gregory Kane

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



SIX-YEAR-OLD Antionette Locke is still traumatized, still recovering from the violation of her childhood that occurred during the invasion of her home one week ago today.

At a tender age, Antionette has learned to hate police.

She saw firsthand a state-sanctioned home invasion, you see. Baltimore police burst into her home around 7 a.m., put a gun to the head of her father, Thor Locke, and forced him to his bedroom floor, where they handcuffed him. Antionette's older brother, 13-year-old Donyea Barnes, was subjected to the same treatment in the hallway. Antionette was standing in the doorway of her bedroom, right next to her parents' bedroom, watching everything.

"I feel bad," the sweet-voiced Antionette said yesterday from her home. "They put a gun to my daddy's head."

"She tells me, 'I'm still mad at the police for what they did to my daddy and brother,'" said Gailya Locke, Antionette's mom. What they did was humiliate Thor Locke and Donyea Barnes and terrorize the entire household, which also included Gailya Locke's daughters Ulia Robinson, 18, and Sha-Le Wolf, 10. Gailya Locke was at work when the raid occurred.

This was one of several drug raids city police carried out last Wednesday. It would have been nice if they had found some drugs or drug paraphernalia, some illegal guns, some large amounts of money. But they found nothing. They arrested no one. The "evidence" they seized was paltry: Thor Locke's bank statement, Gailya Locke's legally registered handgun, Robinson's address book and some pictures of her taken at a hip-hop concert in June or July.

What was the reason for this home invasion, this invasion of privacy, this traumatizing of a six-year-old?

"We'll tell you in one month," city cops told Gailya Locke and her family. Police had a warrant to search the house in the 2900 block of Allendale Road in Northwest Baltimore. The warrant, signed by Circuit Court Judge John Prevas, said that at the Locke's home "there is being concealed certain property, namely, Personal papers showing proprietary interest, Video and Cassette tapes, Ledgers, Electronic Data Storage Devices and U.S. Currency, which is in violation of the laws of Maryland pertaining to Article 27, Section 276-302 of the Annotated Code of Maryland."

More specifically, the warrant charged occupants of the house had violated sections 286 and 286a of the code, the ones about illegal drugs.

So the state, using gobbledygook and double-speak that even George Orwell couldn't have thought of, says, in a nutshell, "There's illegal drug activity going on at the home of Thor and Gailya Locke." They raid it and find no illegal drugs or paraphernalia. Then they say, as justification, "our investigation is continuing. We'll get back to you in 30 days."

The state's continuing investigation, Gailya Locke figures, falls distinctly into the category of none of her concern. She wants to know why police were in her home. No one in her home has a criminal record, she says.

"I'm a minister," Gailya Locke said. "I'm the assistant pastor of a church [Miracle Deliverance Evangelistic Center]. They're telling me I don't have the right to know why they're in my house?"

That's exactly what the state, in its arrogance, is telling her.

Legally, they're allowed to seal an affidavit for 30 days. Ragina Averella, a spokesman for Baltimore police, said, "We had a valid reason to be there. It's part of an ongoing investigation."

The warrant, Averella said, was legal, as if that somehow makes it right. The skeptics among us remember that slavery and the Fugitive Slave Law were also "legal."

This "drug raid" is justified, some may feel, by the war on drugs. But the war on drugs is failing. What's working is the war on civil liberties, privacy and terrorizing unoffending citizens and children. Police gleefully went before television cameras days before the Allendale Road "raid" and boasted proudly of breaking up a "major" drug ring in East Baltimore. Cops break up "major" drug rings every two months or so. But we don't hear from them when they raid a house and find nothing illegal. When they're questioned, they hide behind the 30-day sealed-affidavit law.

Lawmakers who still believe in privacy - if, indeed, there are any left - could change this. Simply pass a bill that says if cops raid a home for drugs and find nothing, they have to unseal the affidavit that day and tell the occupants of the house exactly why police made the raid. They would have to reveal precisely what probable cause led to it. Police shouldn't be allowed to hide behind the "ongoing investigation" excuse. That's justification for not unsealing the affidavit within 30 days, or 30 months or 30 years, depending on how long the investigation lasts.

"I'm not waiting 30 days," Gailya Locke vowed. "Somebody's telling me something."
 
The war on drugs has done more damage to out civil rights and done more to farther a police state then anything in history.Between that and for the children we should be slaves withing 10 years.Can everyone say TRAVEL PAPERS.

------------------
Bob--- Age and deceit will overcome youth and speed.
I'm old and deceitful.
 
Give the police a tool and they will find an efficient use for it. I don't blame this sad reality upon them alone. We all created it.

During a labor day social event I overheard the the stories of a very successful drug warrior. He was a dog handler but stated that he knew a perp even before the animal hit. I.E. the dog was there to verify his finely tuned evaluation of human reaction.
He did seem to have an impressive track record in contraband confiscation. I admire his resolve.
He related his most recent stop which involved a rented RV and a large amount of "hidden" cash. How much actual drugs discovered? None. The money was confiscated and to be fair the people may have been guilty of aquiring it illegaly.
My question to the approving listeners was: Does it not bother you that it is now a crime to carry the wrong amount of legal tender on your person without a "credible" explanation?
What about due process? I got no response other than: Hey they were guilty.
We truly cannot blame the police for delivering what we ordered up. http://www.fear.org/menuidx2.html Here is a useful site on Asset Forfeiture.
 
I've thought long and hard regarding the Drug War. I was one of Bush's soldiers in that effort in the late 80's, I have friends on both sides - Police, and Users.
I have seen the damage that the abuse has caused, the lives ruined, and the deformed children.
All of it is sickening.

Dispite all the above - I feel we need to legalize it. This will solve three problems:
1. Limit the power that police has to invade homes and take property.
2. Limit the power the government has to do the same.
3. Stop gang wars regarding drugs... just like the repeal of prohibition ended a great deal of the Roar in the Roaring Twenties.
 
Legalize drugs and fight real criminals. Tax it and sell the sh*t at gas stations!!! People who want to kill themselves, let it be. We're over-populated anyway :D prisons are overflowing and they're releasing rapists and serial killers to make room for the people who smoke pot in their OWN GOD-DARN HOUSES!!! This is sooo stupid. Ok, I've worked up an anger. I gotta go find some glass to break....
 
This family needs the help of a GOOD lawyer. Not one of those ambulance chaciners specializingin Tort Liability, they need a specialist in Constitutional Law. What isthis crap of raidinga house, then not telling the occupants why they are there? If the PD screwed up, they need to admit it and pay damages. Instead they will pigeon hole the incident, paint the victims as criminals, and basically do what ever it takes to prove they were right.

The only thing that family should be saying now is, "Tell it to my lawyer".

------------------
You can find the price of freedom, buried in the ground.
 
George...I'm with you. But never gonna happen. too much money. Drugs are a major part of our domestic national product. A hell of a lot of people would be out of work without the "war on drugs"

Unless a revolution, hopefully at the polls, occures.

------------------
Sam I am, grn egs n packin

Nikita Khrushchev predicted confidently in a speech in Bucharest, Rumania on June 19, 1962 that: " The United States will eventually fly the Communist Red Flag...the American people will hoist it themselves."
 
Originally posted by George Hill:
I've thought long and hard regarding the Drug War. I was one of Bush's soldiers in that effort in the late 80's, I have friends on both sides - Police, and Users.
I have seen the damage that the abuse has caused, the lives ruined, and the deformed children.
All of it is sickening.

Me too George.
I've witnessed much of what the scourge of addiction can produce also. I don't think government has ever reduced the effects of this problem because, like most social problems, it is out of the realm of government's ability to solve.
I don't like the tax carrot either. Get the government out and keep it out.

We hear alot about NGO's these days. The only organization I have personal experience with that deals with the essence of the problem is AA and AlAnon. They are non-governmental organizations that impact the problem of addiction on a daily basis. They are not perfect nor the only solution. They do have a better track record than the government and they cost taxpayers nothing.

My point is the solution to the problem is among the private sector. Not the state.
 
I'm with you, George. Legalize it. The communistnazi politicians and their media toadies have never had as good an excuse to destroy our Rights and Constitution, than the "War On Drugs."

If people want to commit suicide, let them. No tax money for "drug programs," eithr. I'm responsible for my screwups: narctoics addicts should be for their's, too.

JMHO. J.B.
 
A similar story from San Antonio a year ago:
At eight in morning, a suburban home is raided by 12 black clad policemen. The family is round up, and gathered in the living room. Both kids are handcuffed, and they order the guy to "call your dog" who was hiding under the child's bed. He complies, and when the dog comes in the living room, the cop shoots the dog in front of the children. (Wait, it gets worse)
After searching for an hour in vain, one of the cops sees a guitar in the living room, and strums a tune, and makes up a song about killing the dog.
After the raid, they found out they had the wrong residence (one of those paid informant things). At least it does have a so-so ending. SAPD Chief Al Philipus (sp?) publically acknowledged the error, and made a public apology on KTSA radio (Carl Wigglesworth show). Of course, the family is suing for $12 million now.

STORY #2:
A woman finds a bag containing $70,000.00 and a small handgun. She calls the police, and she is told that if nobody claims the money, she may have it after 6wks. She cannot have the handgun which seems reasonable to me. What happened made me madder than hell though. This woman was told that probably the money wouldn't be claimed. She is excited about it, and at the end of the 6 week period, she goes into the police station to claim her money. She asks if anyone claimed it, and they tell her no, but she cannot have it because they found cocaine residues on some of the cash. WTF???
Yep, because some of the currency had residues of cocaine, the SAPD kept the money and gave the woman the shaft.
Now by this line of thinking, the police could go into any bank-vault and take all the cash because from what I understand, almost all the money in denominations higher than $20 has drug residues on it.
Basically the PD was greedy, and they took the money because they wanted it. Thank God the SA Express-News (POS Mostly) did an article on it, and I can guarantee you not too many folks around San Antonio will ever be as trusting of police again.
The War On Drugs has been a total failure. It is as successful as Prohibition. I think it is even worse than that. Police agencies aren't trusted, we have no privacy or property rights as long as the warrant mentions "drug", and with a lot of judges rubberstamping warrants (Federal), there's a lot of folks getting dead, or being violated all in the name of keeping drugs off the street which hasn't happened.
I said this elsewhere, but it bears repeating: Nobody has convinced me that we had near the drug problem in the 1950's that we do today. The WOD's has actually made the problem exponentially worse. I say call it off while we still have a small portion of the Bill of Rights left.
 
As much as I've seen drugs ruin people and their lives, I must concur with its legalization. To use the "Drug War" as an excuse to erode our civil rights and liberties is a greater threat to us as a nation than the effects of drugs themselves. Legalize it and prostitution. Let it be a health issue and not a police issue.
 
Please remember one thing:

The "War on Drugs" was a Reagan "conservative" initiative. Remember?

Prohibition NEVER works. Not against booze, not against drugs, not against guns.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by G-Freeman:
We truly cannot blame the police for delivering what we ordered up.
[/quote]

I'd say that just about sums it up.



------------------
"...and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
Luke 22:36
"An armed society is a polite society."
Robert Heinlein
"Power corrupts. Absolute power - is kinda cool!"
Fred Reed
 
I think it would be nice if the judge who signed the warrant experienced some uninvited blackclad visitors around 5 am. They could slap him & his wife around a bit, trash the house take some private papers, and say "we'll get back to ya in 30 days if you have any questions. Merry Xmas, f-you"
M2
 
Oh, we can't blame them for following orders? I thought we decided exactly the opposite at Nuremburg? Why exactly do we require oaths to uphold the Constitution of them, if they're not going to be expected to follow those oaths?

------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
 
Nope. Can't get them for following orders.

If you can recall, the sniper that shot the gal at Ruby Ridge can not be held accountable for his actions because he was "following orders." Where does it end?

:mad:

------------------
God, Guns and Guts made this country a great country!

oberkommando sez:
"We lost the first and third and now they are after the Second!(no pun intended)"
 
They raided the house for violations of the Ridiculous Names Act of 1999.

Antionette
Gailya
Ulia
and my personal favorite: Sha-Le Wolf

Sentensing has been postponed until the judge can figure out how to pronounce "Sha-Le."

Shay-Lee? Shah-Leh? Shallee?
 
The War on Some Drugs has morphed into the War on Some Guns, and they're both pounding the Bill of Rights into an early grave ...

Remember the Fully Informed Jury Association ( www.fija.org ) - the power of the jury is one of our few ways to really strike back against this idiocy.

And, some of us have tried to turn back this tide. At least a couple of years ago, Arizona voters approved a proposition to legalize marijuana for medical prescription. The Legislature was incensed, and passed a law which essentially invalidated the proposition until the DEA approved such use. You see that happen a few times, and then you begin to truly understand the state of American 'democracy' these days.

Glad no one was hurt in this case. But, of course, if the kids or parents had been killed, it would have been worth it in the eyes of some people ... any price is worth it when you're searching out dope, apparently.

Regards from AZ
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brett Bellmore:
Oh, we can't blame them for following orders? I thought we decided exactly the opposite at Nuremburg? Why exactly do we require oaths to uphold the Constitution of them, if they're not going to be expected to follow those oaths?

[/quote]

The point G-freeman was making was not about following orders. What he was saying is we, the american people, are the ones who asked for this by wanting the WOD.


The problem with legalizing drugs is they want us, the american taxpayers to pay for their treatment and upkeep. Did you guys know that addicition to drugs or alcohol entitles a person to disability benefits? I couldn't believe this when I found this out. I have arrested many people who say they are on disability when I ask them where they work. I ask them why are they on disability and they say because they are addicts.

Either way WE are going to pay for the drug use by idiots. Next time you see a liberal shake their hand and thank them.
 
Back
Top