9 horrifyingly botched police raids: How do we keep this from happening?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Strun,

At a minimum, enter the wrong house the officer and department should be liable, civilly, for the screw up. Kill someone in the wrong house, oops just will not cut it.

Can you comment on the dog shooting? Is there a tactical reason the animals are being shot instead of letting the owners tie them up or put them in a room?

[Sturn]

Sturn, are you familiar with the sad case of the Polish immigrant in Vancouver who was essentially lost and wandering around for hours, and the Mounties who came and tasered him over and over until he died of a heart attack? They lied through their teeth about what happened, until it turned out someone in the waiting area had video'd the whole thing on their cell phone. http://en.wikipedia...._Taser_incident

That incident utterly disgusted Canadians across the country, not to mention the nation of Poland. There's a pretty firm belief police will lie their asses off if they do anything wrong, and in the end you get the attitudes expressed in this thread.

I'm not sure what you are asking FB. Am I disgusted with that incident? Of course, it's wrong. But, the attitude that all cops are like that based on a few and that cops should be charged with crimes they didn't actually commit is also wrong.

Example. Cop pulls out what he thinks is his taser, shoots it at suspect resisting arrest, then realizes he pulled his gun and has killed the man. There is no evidence he was intending to kill the man. There is no talk about him in the locker room before work stating how he was planning on killing someone and making it look like an accident. The video showing the response of the cop clearly shows how surprised he was himself at the discharge of his gun. So, he totally screwed up and it killed someone. Manslaughter should be the result. Nope. He was charged, convicted, and sentenced for Murder, the intentional killing of a human being. If a train conductor hits the wrong switch while completely sober and it kills someone, he is convicted of Manslaughter at the most, not Murder. That is what scares me. Unequal justice.

When I first became a cop, I was told I had no right to a Miranda warning if I was a suspect of a crime due to my job.

[Sturn]

Strun,

At a minimum, enter the wrong house the officer and department should be liable, civilly, for the screw up. Kill someone in the wrong house, oops just will not cut it.

I completely agree. It's the first 9 points in my list referring to posts above that I had a problem with. I'm not defending any police who did something wrong.

[Sturn]

Yes you bloody well should! Firing a gun when you can't see where the bullet will end up and there are innocents present is unacceptably reckless at best. If you believe there's a serious possibility of a firefight breaking out, evacuate the building before going in. If you're not expecting to be shot at, don't bring a gun.

Are you joking or just not in touch with the reality of law enforcement?

So, all criminals will automatically evacuate their residence when the police arrive to serve a search warrant? That's good to know. Thanks. Next time I will just announce by PA, "Ally ally in come free", wait for them all to come out, and go home since no will stay inside.

When someone shoots at me I can't shoot back unless I'm on an uncluttered open desert plain with no one else behind the bad guy in a 45 degree arc?

If the target residence of the search warrant is not known to have guns, all of the cops should just leave theirs at home because there will of course be no guns we had not heard about in the house.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

Are you joking or just not in touch with the reality of law enforcement?

So, all criminals will automatically evacuate their residence when the police arrive to serve a search warrant? That's good to know. Thanks. Next time I will just announce by PA, "Ally ally in come free", wait for them all to come out, and go home since no will stay inside.

When someone shoots at me I can't shoot back unless I'm on an uncluttered open desert plain with no one else behind the bad guy in a 45 degree arc?

If the target residence of the search warrant is not known to have guns, all of the cops should just leave theirs at home because there will of course be no guns we had not heard about in the house.

Its just too hard to serve search warrants when the suspects are not at home?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Sturn,

Can you comment on the officers killing the dogs?

[Sturn]

I guess it would be up to you. Do you take the fall for serving a false warrant or testify against the guy on the additional charges of fraud and inciting violence?

What if the screw up by the person writing the warrant was unintentional? I'm all for throwing a cop that purposely put the wrong address on a warrant into a jail then a homeless shelter when he gets out of prison. What I'm not for is the cop serving time in prison because he typed a "5" instead of a "2" on an address and didn't notice his screwup. Fired, sued, etc for the screw up, sure. Charged with intentional fraud, intentional inciting of violence? Are you kidding me? If I'm working at a company and I make a typo in an offer that costs my employer $5,000, I should be fired and possibly sued. Should I be thrown into prison for felony theft?

[Sturn]

Its just too hard to serve search warrants when the suspects are not at home?

Nope it happens all of the time. When the evidence is at home and the bad guy is elsewhere this is optimal. The bad guy is sometimes stopped in a car or grabbed at work (rarely, they typically don't have a legal job) while other cops hit the house at the same time.

It doesn't always work that way. Sometimes the warrant is for the person, not the evidence in the house. And of course, "barricaded subjects", but by definition are at home and won't come out.

Regarding drug houses, they seem to rarely have no occupants, day or night. Bad for business and the stash.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

What if the screw up by the person writing the warrant was unintentional? I'm all for throwing a cop that purposely put the wrong address on a warrant into a jail then a homeless shelter when he gets out of prison. What I'm not for is the cop serving time in prison because he typed a "5" instead of a "2" on an address and didn't notice his screwup. Fired, sued, etc for the screw up, sure. Charged with intentional fraud, intentional inciting of violence? Are you kidding me? If I'm working at a company and I make a typo in an offer that costs my employer $5,000, I should be fired and possibly sued. Should I be thrown into prison for felony theft?

"Screwing up" does not cut the mustard when it come to violating natural and constitutional rights. And it's not a typo, the contents of a warrant are sworn under oath. It would only take one felony conviction for it not to happen anymore.

[Sturn]

Sturn,

Can you comment on the officers killing the dogs?

Hard to comment when this is all I know...

Matthew Spaulding says he and his family were terrorized at their own home by police who slammed his grandmother to the ground and shot his dogs-- missing his head by less than an inch. "Told us to get on the ground. I got on the ground they put me in handcuffs," Spaulding recalls, "Then they threw my dad to the ground and my dog Sadie was right here sniffing my head. She was next to me. They shot her. The blood got on my face and then she took off running behind me and they shot her like three more times."

I've got what the residents are saying, nothing about what the police are saying. Lots of information left out. The title suggests that the police were at the right house, but didn't find the stolen goods they were looking for. No idea if there was even a search warrant served.

We just have that while someone was being detained a person was slammed about for no reason and dogs were shot for no reason. If that is the complete truth of what happened, then of course it's completely wrong. Methinks there is much more to this story.

If I'm with my team serving a warrant at a residence known to have guns and a dog comes charging at me with his biters out instead of his licker, a good decision may be to shoot the dog if there are no other safer means. I don't want to be distracted and wresting with a dog when a man steps out with a shotgun. If I'm just chatting with someone about a crime at a house and have no information about a gun invovled, I'm of course going to try to handle the situation much differently and more passively. I've seen used by other officers or by my self mace, a club, a taser, and a gun on a dog before in self defense.

Not so long ago we hit a meth house that had two large, possibly vicious dogs in the yard. We didn't want to kill the dogs but didn't want to get bit or be distracted by them when entering the residence either. Simple fix was a flash bang beside them. One turned out to be chained up and very docile after the big boom. We were suddenly the alphas and he sat back down and wimpered. We didn't see the other unchained one come back until about 2 hours later. :)

[Sturn]

"Screwing up" does not cut the mustard when it come to violating natural and constitutional rights. And it's not a typo, the contents of a warrant are sworn under oath. It would only take one felony conviction for it not to happen anymore.

No, it's still an accidental typo.

If I'm working at a company and I make a typo in an offer that costs my employer $5,000, I should be fired and possibly sued. Should I be thrown into prison for felony theft?

Could you answer this Tormund?

[felice]

So, all criminals will automatically evacuate their residence when the police arrive to serve a search warrant?

The idea is to give non-criminals who happen to live in the same building an opportunity to get out of the way before you go in guns blazing.

When someone shoots at me I can't shoot back unless I'm on an uncluttered open desert plain with no one else behind the bad guy in a 45 degree arc?

When you deliberately initiate a confrontation with an armed criminal, yes, you need to take extreme care to avoid harm to third parties. If someone attacks you randomly while you're walking down the street, the situation is quite different.

What I'm not for is the cop serving time in prison because he typed a "5" instead of a "2" on an address and didn't notice his screwup.

Data verification should be required before the warrant is issued. Eg the cop should need to supply additional information such as the name of the owner/tenant, and the judge should ensure all the supplied data matches before issuing the warrant.

[Sturn]

The idea is to give non-criminals who happen to live in the same building an opportunity to get out of the way before you go in guns blazing.

On a Deliberate entry this is exactly what is done. Dynamic entries are typically only used for a very good reason. I don't recall ever being taught to go in "guns blazing". We are taught to shoot at threats until they are no longer threats while checking backgrounds so as to not put non-threats in harms way. Perhaps the police are different where you live I would be interested in hearing about the reasoning and tactics behind Guns Blazing enties entries (sarcasm of course).

Data verification should be required before the warrant is issued. Eg the cop should need to supply additional information such as the name of the owner/tenant, and the judge should ensure all the supplied data matches before issuing the warrant.

In my experience judges have never, "ensured all the supplied data matches". Affidavits for a search warrant are on a piece of paper with the address of the residence. There isn't an attached map, attached laptop with a google maps screen of the house on the screen, or a telephone book attached.

I agree all steps should be taken to verify the correct address. I've never seen this mistake made. If a mistake is still made and the wrong door is crushed and a person has a gun pointed at them, who if anyone should be serving time for intentional (the only kind) Criminal Damage to Property? Intentional Aggravated Assault? Should we throw the judge in jail too?

I've been asking several questions throughout my posts. While some are rehtorical it seems many that are not have never been answered. I've answered several.

[Merentha]

The sad fucking this is that pretty much everything Sturn is asking for is MILES better than we have now.

No, it's still an accidental typo.

Funny thing, I enter a wrong medical record number on a patient, we do the surgery on the wrong patient, we're (me, mostly) still waaay fucking liable. Hell, I walk in, I hand the wrong dosage of a med that doesn't even cause any harm, I'm probably fired and stand a really good chance of losing my license. How hard is it to triple check something? Shit, before we do any medpass we're supposed to ask the patient to recite their name and date of birth while verifying that against the wristband they have on and the record in the computer. Then, we have computerized checks that scan each med we're administering to make sure they have orders for them. That's after I have to sign out and individually count each and every restricted substance I am trying to administer.

Oooh! Even better, if I am given an order, by a physician, that I double-check with the physician and am told is yes, exactly what he wants and if I don't give it he will do his best to get me fired, and I call up pharmacy and the PharmD tells me that yes, that med is acceptable to give, and I call the fucking house supervisor and am told that yes, I can give that med, if I in fact CANNOT give that med for whatever reason I, the registered nurse, will be the legally responsible party for the med error. (Depending on my documentation, the physician, pharmD, and AoD may also face disciplinary action, but my checks with superiors do not absolve me of a medical error. I very likely stand to lose my license if that med error caused harm, unless the hospital formulary did not have any indication that that med would be inappropriate to administer AND it is determined that a reasonable RN in my position would not have administered the med.)

So yes, I damn well expect that the police can fucking double-check a godddamned warrant before they barge in with guns drawn. Jesus.

edit: And the judge, the person drawing up the warrant, and anyone else connected with the situation. The fact that you can reasonably show up at a house with only an address is appalling.

edit2: Anyone firing on an officer who is conducting a home invasion on the wrong property should not be charged with assaulting an officer. That's ridiculous. If you want equal punishment, you damn well only get the protections afforded you under the law if you are properly carrying out your duties. That includes being in the right home. Any deaths that result from a wrongly served warrant should result in charges of negligent homicide to anyone writing that warrant, anyone serving that warrant, and anyone approving that warrant. Make departments responsible for any damages incurred. I think you'd find that very rapidly, departments would institute several layers of redundancy. They can solve the problems now. They just don't want to.

It isn't individual officers I care about, its the entire system of the police in the United States. I agree that we don't have laws that govern police errors. Lets write them.

[Sturn]

You mentioned losing your job, being liable (assuming you mean in civil court), but I never saw mention of you being thrown into jail.

I completely agree that if a cop screws up ACCIDENTALLY he could be liable in civil court and lose his job if the screw up is big enough. What I don't agree with is charging a cop for a crime for accidentally doing something while doing nothing wrong.

[Sturn]

So yes, I damn well expect that the police can fucking double-check a godddamned warrant before they barge in with guns drawn. Jesus.

I don't know of any place they don't do this. We were given 9 examples in the OP, not all of which were about going to the wrong address. Care to guess how many search warrants are executed at the right address every day? They don't make it on media lists. Pretty much the same reason that screw ups in the medical field get huge attention even though they are extremely rare (hopefully). It's something juicy to get angry about and catch our attention.

[Merentha]

You mentioned losing your job, being liable (assuming you mean in civil court), but I never saw mention of you being thrown into jail.

If someone dies, yes, I can be charged with some form of negligent homicide, as far as I know. And it isn't "lose my job" its "lose my ability to practice in that state (and probably any other)."

I completely agree that if a cop screws up ACCIDENTALLY he could be liable in civil court and lose his job if the screw up is big enough. What I don't agree with is charging a cop for a crime for accidentally doing something while doing nothing wrong.

Thing is, I don't believe for a second that the police will receive anything like a fair trial. Its ridiculously hard to convict or sentence police of anything, even when there is video evidence.

And, it isn't just this. I honestly wouldn't have many problems with the police making mistakes if I thought there would be accountability. And there is practically zero for an organization that is as important as it is. There is zero effective accountability. That's where the rage comes from, at least for me. A hospital that did the wrong surgery on the same wrong patient 50 times would be shut down. Unconditionally. The same will not be said for anyone involved in that colossal fuck-up. I get charged with negligent homicide for injecting the wrong clear liquid into someone that kills them. (Which is easier to do that to confuse a gun and a taser) I certainly do not get 2 years, with double credit for time served, and the ability to work after. And, I don't need several video testimonies to even lead to a trial.

[Lord of Oop North]

I like the idea of equal justice, but, and I say this as a big supporter of the police in general (friends, family ,etc.), that only works if the system itself doesn't serve to protect rotten police from prosecution. Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be the case, and consequently you have a justice system and police forces that build a huge wall around the pedestal that they've put police officers onto, which makes it difficult to prosecute them when they've broken the law. Police are also given extraordinary powers above and beyond the powers of normal citizens, and it's a little silly to hold them to the same standard as you would Joe Blow. With great power comes great responsibility.

[Sturn]

If you do it 50 times? Yes.

Where was I defending that at?

I assumed since that was the incident that's been talked about. You were responding to this thread right?

I didn't know that it's an assumption that if a poster defends some idea that he MUST also be defending what was mentioned in the OP.

[Sturn]

Thing is, I don't believe for a second that the police will receive anything like a fair trial. Its ridiculously hard to convict or sentence police of anything, even when there is video evidence.

I can give examples of exactly the opposite. I've mentioned a couple upthread.

You said, "fair trial". Do you believe the jurors are in on the corruption also? Is it the judge? Or are you arguing that the pedestal police are put on makes it hard in general for a jury to decide to convict a cop? I can understand the last point. The first two would be extremely rare. I could also point out times where a cop is convicted of something when a normal citizen is not would not be because the jury dislikes the cop or cops.