Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Police don't have to knock

  1. #1
    Kickass Rat HOFer CaptainKickass's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    State of Denial!
    Posts
    2,508

    Police don't have to knock

    Link: http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/06/15/scotus.search.ap/


    WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that police armed with a warrant can barge into homes and seize evidence even if they don't knock, a huge government victory that was decided by President Bush's new justices.

    The 5-4 ruling clearly signals the court's conservative shift following the departure of moderate Sandra Day O'Connor.

    The case tested previous court rulings that police armed with warrants generally must knock and announce themselves or they run afoul of the Constitution's Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches.

    Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, said Detroit police acknowledge violating that rule when they called out their presence at a man's door then went inside three seconds to five seconds later.

    "Whether that preliminary misstep had occurred or not, the police would have executed the warrant they had obtained, and would have discovered the gun and drugs inside the house," Scalia wrote.

    But suppressing evidence is too high of a penalty, Scalia said, for errors by police in failing to properly announce themselves.

    The outcome might have been different if O'Connor were still on the bench. She seemed ready, when the case was first argued in January, to rule in favor of Booker Hudson, whose house was searched in 1998.

    O'Connor had worried aloud that officers around the country might start bursting into homes to execute search warrants. She asked: "Is there no policy of protecting the home owner a little bit and the sanctity of the home from this immediate entry?"

    She retired before the case was decided, and a new argument was held so that Justice Samuel Alito could participate in deliberations. Alito and Bush's other Supreme Court pick, Chief Justice John Roberts, both supported Scalia's opinion.

    Hudson's lawyers argued that evidence against him was connected to the improper search and could not be used against him.

    Scalia said that a victory for Hudson would have given "a get-out-of-jail-free card" to him and others.

    In a dissent, four justices complained that the decision erases more than 90 years of Supreme Court precedent.

    "It weakens, perhaps destroys, much of the practical value of the Constitution's knock-and-announce protection," Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for himself and the three other liberal members.

    Breyer said that police will feel free to enter homes without knocking and waiting a short time if they know that there is no punishment for it.

    Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, a moderate, joined the conservatives in most of the ruling. He wrote his own opinion, however, to say "it bears repeating that it is a serious matter if law enforcement officers violate the sanctity of the home by ignoring the requisites of lawful entry."
    "Everyone's born anarchist and atheist until people start lying to them" ~ wise philosopher

  2. #2
    Creepy Rat HOFer SkinBasket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Licking, Taco
    Posts
    14,429

    Re: Police don't have to knock

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainKickass
    "It weakens, perhaps destroys, much of the practical value of the Constitution's knock-and-announce protection," Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for himself and the three other liberal members.
    And just what is the 'practical value of... knock-and-announce protection?" If the police have a warrant, that means a judge has looked over the matter and decided there is cause to seach the property. What is protected by the police waiting 30 seconds instead of none except some criminal's lead time as he grabs his shit and bolts out the back door? Or worse, gives some skinhead fucks or wanksters the chance to lock and load before the door comes off the hinges.

    Some like Breyer will claim that this will lead to mass outbreaks of police crashing through doors, destroying happy homes, and terrifying sleeping children to serve traffic court warrants when in reality they still answer to public scrutiny and will only use the methods allowed through this ruling when they have reason to believe that by announcing themselves a) the subject(s) will flee or b) officer's lives will be at risk.
    "You're all very smart, and I'm very dumb." - Partial

  3. #3
    Kickass Rat HOFer CaptainKickass's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    State of Denial!
    Posts
    2,508
    Let's be straight - I did not write the article, merely reposted. In my gut I just don't think it's a good idea.

    While I can see no practical application for the knock and announce, there must have been one for it to be a rule in the first place. Although conversely, I can see no outstanding reason for it to be changed in the first place. What real advantage is there?

    The only real change I see here is for police to be held "less accountable" for their actions then they already are. That just doesn't seem like the best idea.
    "Everyone's born anarchist and atheist until people start lying to them" ~ wise philosopher

  4. #4
    Creepy Rat HOFer SkinBasket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Licking, Taco
    Posts
    14,429
    Actually I think police safety was the driving reason behind the change. As I mentioned, they're only going to be using this in situations where they know they are entering a hostile environment and they may encounter one or more armed subjects.

    I know if I was going into a crackhouse to arrest a known murderer that was more likely than not armed to the fucking teeth, I wouldn't want to be the poor fuck standing on the doorstep saying, "Um, hello. I'm here to arrest you now. May I come in?"
    "You're all very smart, and I'm very dumb." - Partial

  5. #5
    Will they still be required to wipe their feet?

  6. #6
    Redneck Rat HOFer Little Whiskey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Over There
    Posts
    3,365
    what pisses me off is the military didn't follow the same "knock" law when they dropped the face saving bombs on Zarquowy (however you spell that dead dude's name). its just common courtesy!!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •