Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unfortunately 'probable cause' is a very vague and very abused term. Furthermore, if a judge or a Grand Jury signed off on the warrant then the cops are off the hook.
Yes, but the buck has to stop somewhere. I'm sure it's above the cops.
They were lucky to not be met by some pretty big firepower at the front door.
Nah ... I have seen the movie ..... those cops are gonna wake up one morning to find that their bank accounts and credit cards are all blocked. Then, one by one they will disappear and end up in a secret CIA jail before being sent to Yemen for 'interrogation'.
Alternatively, there is going to be a groveling apology, a sizable financial settlement and the local cops will be under orders to stay well away from that family.
Yes, but the buck has to stop somewhere. I'm sure it's above the cops.
"Hello AnyTown Police Department?"
"Yes, I've been watching my neighbors haul in large bags of stuff, like 100 lb. bags for two days. I think they have a meth lab. Yes, I'm sure. The address is 1234 New Dumbass Lane."
New York was the only one I could find quickly but I'm pretty sure that most states have a similar law now. They were put into place after Oklahoma City.
Yes, but the buck has to stop somewhere. I'm sure it's above the cops.
Problem is that judges will, most of the time, just sign off on the request for a search warrant without really examining the evidence presented by the police. And most of the time they get away with it because people don't have the education or means to defend themselves against abusive searches.
That said, I think the vast majority of police officers are conscientious, honest and trying to do a good job. But, sometimes they get it wrong and the checks and balances in our system - which in this case is a judge reviewing the evidence before issuing a search warrant - don't work well.
Problem is that judges will, most of the time, just sign off on the request for a search warrant without really examining the evidence presented by the police. And most of the time they get away with it because people don't have the education or means to defend themselves against abusive searches.
That said, I think the vast majority of police officers are conscientious, honest and trying to do a good job. But, sometimes they get it wrong and the checks and balances in our system - which in this case is a judge reviewing the evidence before issuing a search warrant - don't work well.
I agree, but it happens way too often and sometimes ends up with a death.
Problem is that judges will, most of the time, just sign off on the request for a search warrant without really examining the evidence presented by the police. And most of the time they get away with it because people don't have the education or means to defend themselves against abusive searches.
.
Yes. Here is an example. These dudes probable had no recourse;
Description: On November 20, 2002, a San Antonio, Texas SWAT team deployed tear gas canisters, shattered a glass door with bullets, then stormed an apartment occupied by three Hispanic men. "We were kicked and punched at least 20 times. I couldn't talk. I was good and scared," Salvador Huerta told the San Antonio News-Express. His cousin Marcos Huerta was taken to the hospital with a cut face and bruised head. Vincent Huerta added, "The way they entered, I never thought it could be police." All three thought the raid was a robbery. Police had the wrong address. Police later blamed the mistake on darkness, and "a cluster of look-alike buildings," despite the fact that officers stated on the warrant that they had conducted surveillance on the suspected residence for two days. Source: Jesse Bogan, "SWAT raid roughs up wrong guys," San Antonio News-Express, November 21, 2002, p. B2. Jesse Bogan, "SAPD to probe storming of wrong house; Officers apparently confused in the dark by look-alike residences," San Antonio News-Express, November 22, 2002, p. A1.
Yeah, most cities like this self-insure their liability up to at least 250k and probably more like a million or more.
Basically, the city administrator and mayor are eventually going to have to write a big check and you know that means a little "talk" with the police dept.
But money may be the only leverage the people have. Huge jury awards will get some attention.
To make a small point, this was the SHERIFF and not the Leawood police dept.
Leawood is an affluent part of the area and I can imagine that the Sheriffs office got a huge amount of heat from the mayor etc. of Leawood over this and rightly so.
Just highlighting this so as not to dog on the Leawood PD.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
