quote:

Originally posted by lbj:
Even if he pointed a gun at the police, he wouldn't have pointed a gun at the police if they had been at the correct address in the first place.

There is no defense whatsoever for being at the wrong address and the homeowner killed as a result of it.

This is absolutely right. Philando Castile, a law abiding gun owner, Justine Damond, an unarmed RP, Ismael Lopez, a decent working man, Kathryn Johnston an Atlanta grandmother just a few examples of citizens killed in fuckups of monumental proportion.

If you can't get pissed about this, you can't get pissed about anything.

In theory, if a SWAT team storms the wrong house and the homeowner shoots first and kills one or more police officers and manages to survive the ordeal, what happens to the homeowner?

quote:

Originally posted by chongosuerte:
If the officers went to a house and were greeted by a man pointing a gun at them, which may or may not be what happened, it is hard to fault them for defending themselves.

If a man went to his door and was greeted by men poimting guns at him, would you find fault in him defending himself?

quote:

Originally posted by cas:

quote:

Originally posted by chongosuerte:
If the officers went to a house and were greeted by a man pointing a gun at them, which may or may not be what happened, it is hard to fault them for defending themselves.

If a man went to his door and was greeted by men poimting guns at him, would you find fault in him defending himself?

When I answer the door, especially at night if I am not expecting a visitor, I generally have both a big dog and a gun at hand.

I bet that is true of many members of this forum.

Thus the situation in which Ismael Lopez met his maker gives me pause.

quote:

Originally posted by cas:

quote:

Originally posted by chongosuerte:
If the officers went to a house and were greeted by a man pointing a gun at them, which may or may not be what happened, it is hard to fault them for defending themselves.

If a man went to his door and was greeted by men poimting guns at him, would you find fault in him defending himself?

If they were not uniformed or otherwise plainly apparent law enforcement officers, then no. And I'd not expect any prosecutor to take him to grand jury.

quote:

Originally posted by SapperSteel:

quote:

Originally posted by cas:

quote:

Originally posted by chongosuerte:
If the officers went to a house and were greeted by a man pointing a gun at them, which may or may not be what happened, it is hard to fault them for defending themselves.

If a man went to his door and was greeted by men poimting guns at him, would you find fault in him defending himself?

When I answer the door, especially at night if I am not expecting a visitor, I generally have both a big dog and a gun at hand.

I bet that is true of many members of this forum.

Thus the situation in which Ismael Lopez met his maker gives me pause.

I do not answer the door when it is dark, unless I am expecting someone.

quote:

Originally posted by chongosuerte:

quote:

Originally posted by Snapping Twig:
No knock warrants, asset forfeiture...

Things got to change!

There is no indication that this was either a no-knock warrant, or asset forfeiture.

If the officers went to a house and were greeted by a man pointing a gun at them, which may or may not be what happened, it is hard to fault them for defending themselves.

If that is not what happened, it is hard to defend them from that fault.

We will see.

But do not confuse serving an arrest warrant with serving a search warrant. Nationwide, tens of thousands of arrest warrants are served every day. A few thousand dynamic search warrants on physical locations are served every week. A small percentage of those are truly no-knock.

I wasn't being literal. What I was pointing out is things that should not be in the United States, reflecting on what appears to be a colossal screw up in the OP.

I'd think that if the police got the wrong address and a homeowner was assaulted and reacted resulting in death or injury to the police, the homeowner would get a clear bill and no charges. Defending one's self is not a crime.

This assumes the police are aggressive and do not adequately announce themselves.

quote:

Originally posted by smithnsig:
Po Po needs to leave folks alone. And if they can't, make damn sure they are at the right house. I mean, the dang postman can get it right.

We are. Ask Baltimore...

quote:

Originally posted by Snapping Twig:

quote:

Originally posted by chongosuerte:

quote:

Originally posted by Snapping Twig:
No knock warrants, asset forfeiture...

Things got to change!

There is no indication that this was either a no-knock warrant, or asset forfeiture.

If the officers went to a house and were greeted by a man pointing a gun at them, which may or may not be what happened, it is hard to fault them for defending themselves.

If that is not what happened, it is hard to defend them from that fault.

We will see.

But do not confuse serving an arrest warrant with serving a search warrant. Nationwide, tens of thousands of arrest warrants are served every day. A few thousand dynamic search warrants on physical locations are served every week. A small percentage of those are truly no-knock.

I wasn't being literal. What I was pointing out is things that should not be in the United States, reflecting on what appears to be a colossal screw up in the OP.

I'd think that if the police got the wrong address and a homeowner was assaulted and reacted resulting in death or injury to the police, the homeowner would get a clear bill and no charges. Defending one's self is not a crime.

This assumes the police are aggressive and do not adequately announce themselves.

Is that not the standard?

Has there been a recent case that fits your description where the homeowner was criminally charged, and didn't receive significant monetary payment for the government's screw up?

Some states have codefied law stating their citizens can defend themselves in those situations, just to remove any question. The rest have common sense.


I told a story here years ago about finding myself in a sticky situation that brings up your point. As I recall, several people reconsidered their reaction. Perhaps I should relate it again in its own thread.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: chongosuerte,

Hmmm....

The Tac guys in my agency all have big bold "POLICE" or "SHERIFF" emblazoned across the back of their camouflage utility uniforms. Can't ever recall seeing them approach walking backwards though. They do have embroidered badge patches though in subdued color scheme. My guess is it is pretty hard to identify them as "uniformed" in the dark. I seem to see a lot of tac units also wearing balaclavas. Guys wearing mask, carrying guns, coming at my house when I have no reason to expect the cops? Ima gonna go with "Bad guy"

If an unidentified armed force is approaching the wrong house and the homeowner responds with a gun of his own, I think it is a little disingenuous to claim the officers have the right to "defend" themselves.

How would it play out if I approach a cop with my gun drawn, then in response to him drawing his gun, I shoot and kill him. Do I get to claim self-defense? Hey, he pulled a gun on me! You can't seperate the fact they were at the wrong place and had no business doing an armed assault.

This was an arrest warrant, not a search warrant? So what harm in a tactical withdrawal when faced with armed resistance. Set perimeter, get on the PA and work things out instead of going right to the trigger? Doesn't sound like a case where there would be a concern of destroying evidence.


Colossal fuck up for sure. Expect the LEO folks to acknowledge the error, but still circle the wagons and explain or excuse their brethren. How many people involved? No one thought to just maybe double check a few things before setting down that path?

High time for folks to face personal responsibility and consequences when they are so professionally negligent instead of the taxpayers being the one punished via footing the bill for the settlement.

No "skin in the game" means little incentive to measure twice and cut once. If I was king, there would be criminal charges for those responsible for the address fuck up.

quote:

Originally posted by slabsides45:
I didn't read, even in the police account, that they identified themselves as police officers, but rather shouted "put the gun down!"

So is that the new standard? Follow any "lawful" command, on your property, at any time, without proper identification? I know, I know, the facts will come out....

The Supreme Court used to require "Knock and Announce" otherwise they would exclude any evidence found in the search (Wilson v. Arkansas). The K&A rule/requirement has been significantly eroded since then. And the exceptions to it are big enough to drive an aircraft carrier through. Exigency is the biggest one. If you are warrant-serving LE and you believe your life to be in danger, that's definitely an exception to K&A. Another would be preventing the destruction of evidence.

If officers believed they saw a gun, it would be logical that their first priority would be addressing the threat rather than proclaiming their identity.

I'm not in any way justifying what happened, just trying to answer your question as best I can.

This kind of thing could be easily avoided if the person who applied for the warrant was required to accompany the team that served the warrant. It will likely never be law, but it seems like a damn good department policy.

Kind of like "the one who passes the sentence should swing the sword."

I really don't understand the defense (by some) of this sort of shit show. There are some times when your brothers are just not on the right side of a situation. Acknowledging that would be a good way to rebuild trust.

In the medical world, this would be the equivalent of a surgeon amputating a limb on the wrong patient and then trying to justify it because the person had a hangnail that could have become infected. Once the scalpel touches skin or the boot touches the door, you own every single negative consequence of that initial action. There is NO justification after that.

quote:

Originally posted by MNSIG:
I really don't understand the defense (by some) of this sort of shit show. There are some times when your brothers are just not on the right side of a situation. Acknowledging that would be a good way to rebuild trust.

Build what trust? If your confidence is eroded in YOUR local police over what has happened in a different state, you have issues my friend. The internet cops you know? Lose faith in them? Over what? Not jumping on the speculation bandwagon and burning torches? Sharpening pitchforks?

Here's the thing. All we know at this point is that a dude was shot at the wrong house. That is it. Within a few posts, no knock warrants are brought up. Asset forfeiture is brought up. Speculation of SWAT (militarization of the police) is brought up. Hell, you even had one poster question whether the officers identified themselves because a NEWS ARTICLE didn't say it. Ninety Nine percent of everything in this thread is SPECULATION based upon OPINION based upon a NEWS ARTICLE. Nowhere in the article did it mention a no knock warrant, asset forfeiture, or SWAT. It is people's assumptions because that is what they want to believe in these threads. Sadly, it has become the same old never let a crisis go to waste. All I need is a WAR ON DRUGS reference and I got myself a police thread BINGO.

Man, we're all smart enough to know what the media is. At least I think we are. We know to take things with a grain of salt because they lie. A lot. We know this. But, something like this comes out, and it is the word of GOD!!! No, it isn't. It is the same slant that it always is written from the side of the family attorney who is looking at a payday.

Every bit in this is speculation, very few facts. So, I'm not going to get real torqued up and apologize profusely over something that I don't know the actual facts on as much as the media gets it wrong. The other bad thing is that speculation is a one way street around here. When a cop starts speculating that there may be more to it, now he is defending what happened. I've read that nowhere in this thread. They have just speculated that there may be more factors. Does it look bad? Yes, it does. But, so did the Michael Brown shooting. And so many others. What does the family always say? Yeah, they always say they didn't have no gun or nuthin. Always. Did the attorney in this article fail to produce. Nope. Some of the speculation in this tread is down right crazy. Some people lose their minds and are so willing to believe and speculate on facts that the article doesn't even mention. And that is sad.

When a gun owners shoots up a doctors office, I don't lose my faith in other gun owners that live several states away. When cops do horrible things, I don't look down my nose at everyone else. That is what groups like BLM do. And it is unwarranted.

If we don't want cops to come into these threads on speculate, because only speculation of one form is welcome, let's just say so from jump street. Speculation is a two way street man.

My opinion of this is that I have no opinion. I wasn't there. Does it look bad, yeah it does based upon what the news reports. But, as much as they get it wrong, yeah, I'll pass on forming an opinion on what is reported alone.

If you'll look back on page one, I posted "Right on track". And this thread has taken the usual route of speculation down one street only, with all the no knock, asset forfeiture, SWAT baby killings militarized police glory. (Might I remind everyone that this lopsided article mentioned NONE of that, but it didn't stop the usual speculation because hey, its fun). Even more sadly, I guess that it has taken the regrettable turn that "if you won't sharpen the pitchforks with us, you must be defending them". That isn't "circling the wagons", it is critical thinking.

quote:

Originally posted by Dead_Eye:
In theory, if a SWAT team storms the wrong house and the homeowner shoots first and kills one or more police officers and manages to survive the ordeal, what happens to the homeowner?

the problem with your question is the "manages to survive" part.... I really don't think the rest of the team would allow that to happen. You kill one of them - all bets are off, and they are going to storm the house or blow it up or whatever they need to do to get you dead.

swing for the fences,
Eight million dollars to start , settle out of court for four million

These shootings are horrible. Absolutely terrible for everyone.

As I sit in the comfort of my recliner, I well know I could never do Law mans job. Prayers to all.

911boss I agree 100% with your post. Well said.

I'd like to point out how perfect I am.

I respond to an average of 100 calls every one of my 4-day work-weeks. Some days it is 30 calls a day.

I usually end up at the wrong location at least once a shift, usually more. Sometimes I'm in the wrong goddam city, or STATE. This can be due to a failure to number a house, a wrong position on the map, a dispatcher not telling us a location was sourced from cell phone GPS, shitty information from a caller, my computer getting hung up on another call and mis-dispatching me, or someone googling the dispatch number from another city/state to provide information and calling the wrong agency. These mistakes happen every freaking day, multiple times a day.

The article says the officers were serving an arrest warrant. This is a night and day difference from serving a search warrant that has been researched, mapped, included with a photograph and all known inhabitants, approved by a supervisor, sometimes several, and signed off by a magistrate or judge.

Serving an arrest warrant is an every-day thing. It could be something called in by someone anonymously, three states away, that says someone at 123 Street has a warrant for beating up their girlfriend. It could be officers using an address that the arrestee provided himself a year ago when arrested for something else. It could be someone with the DMV fat-fingering "Lot 7" instead of "Lot 9" for the trailer. It could be none of the GD trailers having numbers, which I've seen plenty of times, and them going to knock on a door to ask. Who the hell knows. But I can come up with a half-dozen most likely scenarios, due to having done them myself, on why they were at the wrong place.

Going to wrong locations based on 911 calls is an EVERY DAY THING. And it is nowhere near the same as doing a SWAT dynamic entry on the wrong search warrant location.

quote:

Originally posted by chongosuerte:
I'd like to point out how perfect I am.

I respond to an average of 100 calls every one of my 4-day work-weeks. Some days it is 30 calls a day.

I usually end up at the wrong location at least once a shift, usually more. Sometimes I'm in the wrong goddam city, or STATE. This can be due to a failure to number a house, a wrong position on the map, a dispatcher not telling us a location was sourced from cell phone GPS, shitty information from a caller, my computer getting hung up on another call and mis-dispatching me, or someone googling the dispatch number from another city/state to provide information and calling the wrong agency. These mistakes happen every freaking day, multiple times a day.

The article says the officers were serving an arrest warrant. This is a night and day difference from serving a search warrant that has been researched, mapped, included with a photograph and all known inhabitants, approved by a supervisor, sometimes several, and signed off by a magistrate or judge.

Serving an arrest warrant is an every-day thing. It could be something called in by someone anonymously, three states away, that says someone at 123 Street has a warrant for beating up their girlfriend. It could be officers using an address that the arrestee provided himself a year ago when arrested for something else. It could be someone with the DMV fat-fingering "Lot 7" instead of "Lot 9" for the trailer. It could be none of the GD trailers having numbers, which I've seen plenty of times, and them going to knock on a door to ask. Who the hell knows. But I can come up with a half-dozen most likely scenarios, due to having done them myself, on why they were at the wrong place.

Going to wrong locations based on 911 calls is an EVERY DAY THING. And it is nowhere near the same as doing a SWAT dynamic entry on the wrong search warrant location.

And I'll add to it. I go to probably 30 houses per week that are the wrong address. For the person on the civil paper I am looking for, because they lived there 10 years ago, and that is the last address the company suing them has for them. But, attempting service of papers is a Constitutional duty of a KY Sheriff. So, you have to go knock on the door. Or, on an arrest warrant that has an address on it. And dude has't lived there in 10 years.

quote:

Originally posted by chongosuerte:
If the officers went to a house and were greeted by a man pointing a gun at them, which may or may not be what happened, it is hard to fault them for defending themselves.

That is the truth, the whole damn truth, and nothing but the truth.

No criminal history? Who cares.
No warrant? Who cares.
Pointing a gun at uniformed police officers? Bye Felicia.