The inherent dangers associated with No Knock Warrants are always a "High" on the risk mitigation calculator. Cannot understand accepting that kind of risk unless totally necessary.
Man Found Not Guilty for Shooting 3 Cops During No-Knock Raid Read
- Thread starter Dave70968
- Start Date
I'm far from a legal scholar, but how no knock warrants are constitutional is beyond me.
I can't come up with anything in the Constitution that would explicitly forbid them, and--as noted above--I can see (very rare) instances where they're warranted (no pun intended). A much better argument would be an excessive force claim, but that's based in statute, not the Constitution.
What would help is for the officers to exercise common sense in their warrant requests, and judges to exercise meaningful oversight--including asking hard questions--when they grant warrants. Also, even if they're permissible under SCOTUS precedent, state constitutions and statutes can be more restrictive (though they wouldn't be binding on federal agents, just state/county/local). See http://law.okcu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/OCULREV-Spring-2012-Bolick-1-15-7-24-121.pdf for an excellent explanation of the "one-way ratchet;" I had the opportunity to sit in on that lecture while I was in law school.
if nothing else, you'd think that a situation that called for a 'no knock' entry would also mean that a bit more time (and more preparation) were needed. If for no other reason than assessing whether there were other ways to approach the situation.
No knock warrants for drugs should be outlawed nationwide and no knock warrants for all other circumstances should be severely restricted. I'm glad this man has been found not guilty, but he never should've been charged in the first place.
I don't mean to put you on the spot, but would you willingly participate in execution of such a warrant. I understand if you'd rather not respond.
As I read our Castle Doctrine, he should have been allowed to stay at home after the initial investigation, but I suspect since LEO deaths were involved, the DA decided to go against the law.
If I were the Defendant, I would sue the DA and the judge that issued the no knock, and leave the city alone. It wasn't the cities fault. It was two individuals.
The chief of police wouldn't be out of the picture either, but I suspect they are all protected by law from their wrongful decisions, and that's wrong in itself.
If you put yourself in a position of allowing this BS, you need to be held accountable for your actions when it goes down bad.
No I would not.
I've mulled this over many times. I just hope my door is never kicked in because I fear it would be bad for all involved.
Similar threads
