Sorry Granny, Wrong House!

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/27/atl...ing/index.html

Quote:

---

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Federal authorities will investigate last week's police involved shooting death of an elderly woman in Atlanta, the city's police chief announced Monday.

Richard Pennington also said the eight-member narcotics team tied to the incident will be placed on paid leave.

The move came after an informant -- named in a search warrant of the woman's home -- denied buying drugs at the residence, Pennington said.

But police spokesmen had initially said narcotics officers carried out a drug buy Tuesday from a man identified only as "Sam" at Kathryn Johnston's home west of downtown Atlanta.

Pennington said investigators found a small amount of marijuana there after the raid.

"The officers are saying one thing. The confidential informant is saying something else," the chief said.

The decision to turn the case over to the FBI, federal prosecutors, the Fulton County district attorney's office and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, came in the middle of "intense speculation and suspicion" surrounding the shooting, said Pennington.

He promised to make "every document, every witness and piece of evidence" available.

Police said Johnston opened fire on police who tried to enter her home last Tuesday. Three officers were wounded, and Johnston was killed when police returned fire.

Neighbors and relatives said the raid had to have been a mistake. Johnston lived alone and was so afraid of crime in the neighborhood that she wouldn't let neighbors who delivered groceries for her come into her home, they said.

Relatives gave her age as 92, but Fulton County medical examiners put her age at 88.
Reviewing "no-knock" policy

The chief said his department was reviewing its use of "no-knock" raids after the shootout. The warrants are common in narcotics cases when officers fear suspects may try to dispose of drugs or evidence in the time it takes authorities to gain access to the home.

"There are many unanswered questions. I promise each and every citizen that the complete truth will be eventually known, whatever that might be," he said. "But we must all exercise patience while we examine and re-examine every single aspect of these tragic events."

A spokesman for Johnston's family, the Rev. Markel Hutchins, went to Washington to request a federal investigation Monday.

Hutchins said he had received assurance agencies involved would conduct a "swift and thorough" investigation into Johnston's death.

Hutchins said the three mid-level officials with whom he met also promised "all resources at our disposal" to help counter the fallout in the African American community from the fatal shooting.

And a Justice Department official in Washington confirmed the Civil Rights Division's interest in the case.

"We have begun a review of the matter, and are collecting information," spokesperson Cynthia Magnuson said. "The FBI has already begun its investigation and we are coordinating with other agencies."

Hutchins said he urged Justice Department officials to pressure local police departments to stop using "no knock" search warrants.

---

Idiots. Let's see a bunch of people bust into an old lady's house. I don't blame her for reaching for a gun.

Quote:

---

The chief said his department was reviewing its use of "no-knock" raids after the shootout. The warrants are common in narcotics cases when officers fear suspects may try to dispose of drugs or evidence in the time it takes authorities to gain access to the home.

---

No-knock raids are an abomination; innocent people have been slaughtered or thrown in prison for defending their homes from masked home invaders. I have no sympathy for the wounded cops and hope all participants in this raid are fired.

So what if the drug dealer flushes the drugs in the minute or two it takes knocking officers to get in? I guess the police can't handle the price of a free society. The useless SCOTUS hasn't done anything, either.

Crazed Rabbit

The police these days!

While I agree with you in principal, CR, I don't think I have the same vitriol on you in this one. Yes, so-called "no-knock" raids are dangerous business indeed. Essentially, the police are claiming that you have no right to defend yourself from anyone, because even people who have not identified themselves as police have the right to be treated as officers.

But the officers themselves are only following the official policy of the police department for the city of Atlanta. Save your anger for where it rightly belongs, a police commissioner that has annointed himself above and beyond the 4th ammendment, and a local judicial system that supports him in his thwarting of constitutional protections.

an 88 year old woman takes down three officers in a raid before being gunned down herself. Thats hardcore.

Imagine what was going through that old womans mind at the time. She was incredibly brave, but i'm sure fear had a lot to do with it as well.

Are the police not even obliged to shout 'It's the police!' once they've actually broken down your door? I can understand them not rolling up with sirens blaring and declaring their intent with a megaphone, but they must have to identify themselves once they're in your house?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ezrider

an 88 year old woman takes down three officers in a raid before being gunned down herself. Thats hardcore.

---

In the A T L, hardcore is a way of life! I read a little of this article yesterday, but I missed the fact that she hit 3 of them. Not bad shooting for an old girl, but it looks like the APD needs more practice on it's entry methods...

Stories like this make me glad I don't live in Atlanta any more. There has always been plenty of corruption in the city politics, but ever since the Olympics, it's been going downhill.


Strip clubs are good though!:2thumbsup:

[QUOTE=Don Corleone]
But the officers themselves are only following the official policy of the police department for the city of Atlanta./QUOTE]

Sigh, I know it isn't even considered a valid argument anymore but, the nazi's just followed orders too. If the orders are immoral; you don't obey, you quit the job.

There are no apologies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doc_bean

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

But the officers themselves are only following the official policy of the police department for the city of Atlanta.

---

Sigh, I know it isn't even considered a valid argument anymore but, the nazi's just followed orders too. If the orders are immoral; you don't obey, you quit the job.

There are no apologies.

---

Always with the Nazi arguments when the American government comes up... :dizzy2:

Crazed Rabbit said the cops got what they deserved and that he had no sympathy that they got wounded. I said the answer is not to shoot cops, but to force a corrupt police administration to actually respect the laws on the books, and somehow that makes me a Nazi apologist. Nice.

And just for the record, that whole "always question authority" mentality works really well at Universities, pubs and other ivory towers where all the worlds' problems get 'solved' but nobody ever actually does anything. But in the real world, if every cop questioned every order, you'd have a lot of dead cops. So, if you're an anarachist, I'll give you credit for intellectual consistency. Otherwise, I think you ought to put more time into considering the consequences of attitudes you're advocating.

It sounds like less than lethal weapons need to be employed in these kinds of raids.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

It sounds like less than lethal weapons need to be employed in these kinds of raids.

---

Or they could knock?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDC

Or they could knock?

---

Or they could die? ATL is a zoo (but, in a fun way!). Everyone who has lived there knows that. I have a buddy who was a cop there; it's like animal house with real animals.

They could nock, they could die, they could loose evidence. No knock warrants for high risk arrests are a good idea. We don't know what the informant said, he's telling two stories (as they tend to do). I'm assuming that these police were all wearing clothing identifying themselves as such. If you shoot at them because you're afraid of dying that's exactly what will happen to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Or they could die? ATL is a zoo (but, in a fun way!). Everyone who has lived there knows that. I have a buddy who was a cop there; it's like animal house with real animals.

They could nock, they could die, they could loose evidence. No knock warrants for high risk arrests are a good idea. We don't know what the informant said, he's telling two stories (as they tend to do). I'm assuming that these police were all wearing clothing identifying themselves as such. If you shoot at them because you're afraid of dying that's exactly what will happen to you.

---

wth?!

They were unidentifiable, forceful, and armed. Since when is being a policeman safe anyway? You take risks. If you are unable to cope with the risk of being killed or hurt while on duty and are willing to put lives that you should be protecting behind your own... well... That's actually kind of scary if you think of it.

Since when is evidence (scraps of questionable pot in this case) worth more than lives?

Are there any policemen or women on the Org that can relate to these kinds of situations? I do respect police officers and what they do and I find these incidents rather upsetting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrossLOPER

wth?!

They were unidentifiable, forceful, and armed. Since when is being a policeman safe anyway? You take risks. If you are unable to cope with the risk of being killed or hurt while on duty and are willing to put lives that you should be protecting behind your own... well... That's actually kind of scary if you think of it.

Since when is evidence (scraps of questionable pot in this case) worth more than lives?

Are there any policemen or women on the Org that can relate to these kinds of situations? I do respect police officers and what they do and I find these incidents rather upsetting.

---

1. You don't know that.

2. Spoken like someone with NO experience in law enforcement.

3. Hindsight.

4. :bobby:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

1. You don't know that.

2. Spoken like someone with NO experience in law enforcement.

3. Hindsight.

4. :bobby:

---

1. Kind of hard to identify people busting into your house unannounced late at night.

2. I am still awaiting your enlightened view...

3. Maybe she was a terrorist.

4. High-five!

I may be mistaken here, Vladamir, but the article said the shooting started when police kicked the door in without identifying themselves. Is it your argument that when somebody home invades my house, I should allow them to catch their breath and ask to see their shield before I try to defend myself or my family? Doesn't that put a ridiculous burden on law abiding citizens? How do you square that with the 4th ammendment?

And oh, by the way, thank you for your service, which I do respect and appreciate. :bow:

Quote:

---

They could nock, they could die, they could loose evidence. No knock warrants for high risk arrests are a good idea. We don't know what the informant said, he's telling two stories (as they tend to do). I'm assuming that these police were all wearing clothing identifying themselves as such. If you shoot at them because you're afraid of dying that's exactly what will happen to you.

---

Such is the price of a free society. I don't think highly of arguments for safety or the need to find evidence in order to flaunt the constitution.

Don, I don't think Doc_bean was trying to equate you in any way with Nazi apologist, he was just pointing out that the cops can't get off the hook just because they were ordered to do this.

Crazed Rabbit

Sadly, thanks to the Bush Supreme Court, no-knock raids are legal as long as there is a valid warrant. Unfortunately for all of us, and especially this poor old woman, valid warrants can be generated just from "tips" by unreliable informants. In this case, the informant who told police he bought drugs at this old woman's house, thereby instigating the warrant, is now claiming he didn't tell that to police.

So an innocent woman dies because we don't have much in the way of judicial oversight of the warrant procedures in this country. In fact, thanks to Bush and his systematic shredding of the Constitution and the stacked toadie Scalito Court, we have even less oversight than we had 6 years ago.

And beginning in 2007, thanks to certain portions in the Warner 2007 Defense Authorization Act, if you piss off your neighbor and he makes an anonymous call "informing" federal authorities that you are making bombs in your garage, you - even a native-born U.S. citizen with no police record - can be declared an "enemy comabatant" without judicial review or any standard of proof and immediately loose most if not all of your Constitutional rights, including habeus corpus, and be detained indefinitely without charge, without trial, without a lawyer and without any contact with the outside world. In effect you can disappear, and no judge even gets to hear if it was justified. All based on the tip of an informant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I may be mistaken here, Vladamir, but the article said the shooting started when police kicked the door in without identifying themselves. Is it your argument that when somebody home invades my house, I should allow them to catch their breath and ask to see their shield before I try to defend myself or my family? Doesn't that put a ridiculous burden on law abiding citizens? How do you square that with the 4th ammendment?

And oh, by the way, thank you for your service, which I do respect and appreciate. :bow:

---

I didn't see that in the quoted part in the post. Usually police identify themselves in the moment before the break down the door and several times afterwards. In less this granny packed heat just bumbing around the home, there was pleanty of time for the police to identify themselves, as they should have (if they did); the timing is in question. As far as seing their "shield": Several heavily armed and armored men, in tactical gear, with the word POLICE across their chest is enough of a hint for me.

Oh and don't give me that thank you garbage, either of you! (:laugh4: ~;) ) Past tense mind you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Oh and don't give me that thank you garbage, either of you! (:laugh4: ~;) ) Past tense mind you.

---

Just because we don't agree on the limits of police power doesn't mean that I don't mean what I say. I really do appreciate what you and your brother officers do. I don't fear the police and I don't distrust them, but I don't want to grant them unfettered access to any home they choose to invade, without bothering to identify themselves.

I just really think that no-knock searches are a formula for disaster. If 4 burly men dressed head to toe in black fatigues, wearing masks break my door in and start screaming at me to get on the ground while waving assault rifles in my direction, I'm going to barricade the bedroom door, dial 911, and shoot back. Sorry, I'm not a slave, and I won't act like one, no matter how much I appreciate how difficult the job is that the police do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

As far as seing their "shield": Several heavily armed and armored men, in tactical gear, with the word POLICE across their chest is enough of a hint for me.

---

So the first thing you do in a life or death situation is read what the guy's shirt says? It really doesn't matter (in this aspect) that much what you do or do not do after you're already inside.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrossLOPER

So the first thing you do in a life or death situation is read what the guy's shirt says? It really doesn't matter (in this aspect) that much what you do or do not do after you're already inside.

---

I'm just teasin' ya Don. There's a rule when facing heavily armed and motivated cops: Don't Run! If they aren't cops, a door baricade isn't going to save you. If they are cops, Resistance is Futile.
.
.
.

Yes, I do. I don't start spraying bullets like some crazed Jihadi. Again, read my previous post. Like I said, big white letters.

Sorry, Vlad, my eyes are starting to go. Could you tell me where I can find the POLICE on this guy's chest? Or even INS?

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v...0/Inselian.jpg

This is why no knock raids are wrong, and idiotic. Their unconstitutional, and there tends to be far more deaths then are needed and let me get this clear, 1 preventable death occuring to a citizen while serving a warrant is to many. Not to mention they were going on information that was provided by just an informant. I also doubt there was much time spent searching the area, becuase no grandma requires a swat/police raid into their house to get them to surender peacefully.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

It sounds like less than lethal weapons need to be employed in these kinds of raids.

---

A tazer would more then likely have killed her. She's 88 why in the heck would any weapon be needed. Knock on the door.

Honestly if someone comes busting in my door at 0dark 30 with guns and tactical equipment screaming at me. I'm not going to waste much time thinking of who they could be, if any. If a cop can't understand these risks then don't moan about a loss on these raids.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aenlic

Sadly, thanks to the Bush Supreme Court

---

Aenlic I'd hate to point this oversight out. But this happened in Atlanta, by the Atlanta Polive Department. The federal level wasn't involved. Blaming the president is insane, blame the governor or mayor if you must blame an executive level official. These no knock raids have also been going on for well over a decade. Starting a little before clinton if i remember correctly, and only becoming more broadly used during the clinton administration. Go after the real people to blame here not just the easy ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aenlic

And beginning in 2007, thanks to certain portions in the Warner 2007 Defense Authorization Act

---

There was a thread around a couple weeks ago about that, you may want to read it closer.

88, would she have been able to read POLICE if it was there? Would her hearing be reduced? How about a person having reduced sight and hearing? Isn't it natural to trigger a fight back reaction (no clue what happens, your body reacts)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TosaInu

88, would she have been able to read POLICE if it was there? Would her hearing be reduced? How about a person having reduced sight and hearing? Isn't it natural to trigger a fight back reaction (no clue what happens, your body reacts)?

---

Hey, your butt first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigTex

This is why no knock raids are wrong, and idiotic. Their unconstitutional...

...

Aenlic I'd hate to point this oversight out. But this happened in Atlanta, by the Atlanta Polive Department. The federal level wasn't involved. Blaming the president is insane, blame the governor or mayor if you must blame an executive level official. These no knock raids have also been going on for well over a decade. Starting a little before clinton if i remember correctly, and only becoming more broadly used during the clinton administration. Go after the real people to blame here not just the easy ones.

---

First off, The U.S. Supreme Court has rendered several decisions about no-knock raids since Bush stacked the court with idiots who don't seem to read the same copy of the Constitution I have. As recently as last June, the SCOTUS decided that no-knock warrants are legal and contitutional, in a case in which a lower court threw out evidence obtained after a no-knock entry.

What does it happening in Atlanta have to do with anything? The Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of all laws, when challenged, not just federal laws. See the above case from June, in fact. The deciding vote in the June decision was Scalito. The blame is there to lay. And coupled with Bush's trashing of many of our other constitutional protections, I am completely justified in blaming it on the Bush administration and the court he's stacked with buffoons like Alito. Do you just not get that the Supreme Court enabled these no-knock raids? The authorities in Atlanta were just doing what the Supreme Court - under Bush - allowed them to do.

We've gone from dealing with that idiot Clinton's "it depends on what the definition of is... is" which is relatively harmless, to Bush and idiots on his staff like Alberto Gonzalez playing "it depends on what the definition of torture is" and "it depends on what the definition of enemy combatant is" and worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aenlic

First off, The U.S. Supreme Court has rendered several decisions about no-knock raids since Bush stacked the court with idiots who don't seem to read the same copy of the Constitution I have. As recently as last June, the SCOTUS decided that no-knock warrants are legal and contitutional, in a case in which a lower court threw out evidence obtained after a no-knock entry.

---

Linky (whoring my own thread :smug:)
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=65944

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Always with the Nazi arguments when the American government comes up... :dizzy2:

---

Huh, I would make this comparison if it had applied to any other government too.

Quote:

---

Crazed Rabbit said the cops got what they deserved and that he had no sympathy that they got wounded. I said the answer is not to shoot cops, but to force a corrupt police administration to actually respect the laws on the books, and somehow that makes me a Nazi apologist. Nice.

---

I never said you were. Apologies if I wasn't clear enough on that.

Quote:

---

And just for the record, that whole "always question authority" mentality works really well at Universities, pubs and other ivory towers where all the worlds' problems get 'solved' but nobody ever actually does anything. But in the real world, if every cop questioned every order, you'd have a lot of dead cops. So, if you're an anarachist, I'll give you credit for intellectual consistency. Otherwise, I think you ought to put more time into considering the consequences of attitudes you're advocating.

---

Well, after you did a few raids and killed a few grannies, I think it's safe to say you could make a moral judgement on what you were doing. If you think you do more good with your job than bad, then keep doing it, otherwise quit. I'm not saying you should always take the moral high ground, but in the end YOU are responsible for YOUR actions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doc_bean

Huh, I would make this comparison if it had applied to any other government too.

---

Well, bravo for you on that, but I would still argue that comparing every oppressive/ham-handed organization or government to the Nazis diminishes the special horror Nazis should inspire in people.

Quote:

---

Well, after you did a few raids and killed a few grannies, I think it's safe to say you could make a moral judgement on what you were doing. If you think you do more good with your job than bad, then keep doing it, otherwise quit. I'm not saying you should always take the moral high ground, but in the end YOU are responsible for YOUR actions.

---

You and I are in 100% agreement that this was a tragedy and never should have happened. Where we appear to diverge is where the root cause and responsibility lie. I blame the commissioner that instituted an illegal policy, and the judiciary that turned a blind eye to it.

You apparently blame the individual patrolman on the ground for carrying out the policy. In doing this, you make it clear that you have limited understanding of how the chain of command works when lives are on the line. If you, as a police officer or a soldier in a hot zone, sat down and evaluated which orders violate your personal ethos, you're going to get your mates killed. At some level, you have to trust that your orders are legitimate and simply act on them.