cops murder doctor in his own home

SmarterthanYou said:
An actual arrest warrant allows them to enter the house upon opening the door.
Click to expand...
One the police are trying to arrest someone, whether through a warrant, exigent circumstances, or even by mistake, and the arrested party starts to flee, the police can enter any private property following the fugitive. This was a clear cut hot pursuit case.

Had he not identified himself, it would have made an arrest difficult, and they probably could not have entered the property. He identified himself, and then heard he was under arrest, before fleeing into the house.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
no, they did not. modern policing and current jurist doctrine is that if police have a warrant, they do not need to wait for a subject to be outside the house. An actual arrest warrant allows them to enter the house upon opening the door. they did no do that which clearly shows they did not have a warrant.
Click to expand...
That shows no such thing. Non-sequitur fallacy.
SmarterthanYou said:
I get it. you're ignorant and uneducated. You need government/media to tell you what to believe. anything else is abhorrent to your expectations of a benevolent government. that's too bad. congrats. You are a part of society's downfall
Click to expand...
Inversion fallacy. Extreme argument fallacy.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
so, to clarify, your position is to let government do whatever it wants and let the courts (part of that government) sort it out..........you realize that this is part of why the founders rebelled, right?
Click to expand...
It is not why the founders rebelled. Ignoring history won't help you. You cannot justify lawlessness that way!

Your home will not protect you from an arrest warrant.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
all of the above could have been simply stated as you believe in the ends justifying the means. They did not have an arrest warrant. If you actually had any law knowledge, you would have deduced that. everything after the illegal entry is just unconstitutional, but that's why we have the governments we have today, because most people dont' give a fuck about rights or the law, only that the government makes them feel safe.
Click to expand...
The entry was not illegal.
 
Walt said:
How did his rebellion of one turn out? If you are going to have a rebellion, it is probably better to organize the rebellion first.

He was clearly in the wrong. He should not have vandalized his ex-wife's family's car. He was filmed doing it. It is not worth rebelling against the government so one idiot can vandalize a car.

But if you disagree, then organize your rebellion. Do not do it piecemeal. Actually organize an army to overthrow the US Government, and write a new Constitution that gives an absolute right for any man to vandalize an ex-wife's family's car.
Click to expand...
again, you should just say that you'll give government all benefit of the doubt, regardless of the laws;..........you really have no clue about the Constitution either, so stop referencing it
 
Walt said:
One the police are trying to arrest someone, whether through a warrant, exigent circumstances, or even by mistake, and the arrested party starts to flee, the police can enter any private property following the fugitive. This was a clear cut hot pursuit case.

Had he not identified himself, it would have made an arrest difficult, and they probably could not have entered the property. He identified himself, and then heard he was under arrest, before fleeing into the house.
Click to expand...
you are wrong. end of story. stop trying to debate shit about laws when you have no knowledge of them
 
SmarterthanYou said:
modern policing and current jurist doctrine is that if police have a warrant, they do not need to wait for a subject to be outside the house.
Click to expand...
Police cannot just arrest random people without a warrant. There needs to be probable cause along with exigent circumstances. If the police see armed men in masks running from a bank with bags of money, they do not need a warrant to arrest them.

In this case, the police had almost a week to apply for a warrant, get it, and then come out to serve the warrant. They did not have the right to enter the house, if unless he was fleeing into the house, which he was. Had he not come to the door, or refused to identify himself when he did come to the door, they could not have entered the house, even if they believed he was probably inside.

He was served an arrest warrant, where he was told he was arrested(but not that it was under a warrant). His response was first to flee, and second to draw a gun to try to murder the police.

If I felt strongly that it should be every man's right to vandalize his ex-wife's family's cars(I do not, but if I did), I might rebel against the US Government taking away this "right." That rebellion would not be me alone pulling out a gun trying to kill one or two police officers. His attempt to kill those police officers accomplished nothing. Even had he killed both those police officers, more police officers would have come until he would have lost.

SmarterthanYou said:
You are a part of society's downfall
Click to expand...
It has gotten to a point that when a man is caught on video vandalizing a car, he actually gets arrested.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
again, you should just say that you'll give government all benefit of the doubt, regardless of the laws;..........you really have no clue about the Constitution either, so stop referencing it
Click to expand...
My solution, fighting cases in court, often works. Your solution, murdering a police officer alone, never works. There is a third solution, having a revolution, but I ask why is that necessary over vandalizing a car.

He was clearly in the wrong. He should not have vandalized the car, or harassed the people. We all make mistakes. If he had taken it to the courts, or more accurately plea bargained it, he could have gotten most of it to go away.

The big mistake was trying to murder a police officer in order to avoid arrest.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
yes, it was
Click to expand...
You basically admitted that you didn’t know if they had a warrant
S

Post in thread 'cops murder doctor in his own home'

anonymoose said:
Do you have the court documents verifying that claim?
Click to expand...
sadly, all of that seems to be playing out. However, it has been precedence for over a decade that an actual warrant does not prevent law enforcement from entering the premises
and if they did the entry was legal.
 
Walt said:
My solution, fighting cases in court, often works. Your solution, murdering a police officer alone, never works. There is a third solution, having a revolution, but I ask why is that necessary over vandalizing a car.

He was clearly in the wrong. He should not have vandalized the car, or harassed the people. We all make mistakes. If he had taken it to the courts, or more accurately plea bargained it, he could have gotten most of it to go away.

The big mistake was trying to murder a police officer in order to avoid arrest.
Click to expand...
AGAIN!!!!!!!!!! just admit that you prefer the government control everything, your rights, your freedom, the concept of law.......you believe that a citizen has no rights and let the government sort it out. end of story. admit it.
 
anonymoose said:
You basically admitted that you didn’t know if they had a warrant
S

Post in thread 'cops murder doctor in his own home'

anonymoose said:
Do you have the court documents verifying that claim?
Click to expand...
sadly, all of that seems to be playing out. However, it has been precedence for over a decade that an actual warrant does not prevent law enforcement from entering the premises
and if they did the entry was legal.
Click to expand...
lets make this fine line...............if the cops actually had a warrant, they did NOT NEED to sit outside and coax the homeowner outside, where his constitutional protections were lesser than inside the home. Had those officers actually had a warrant, Supreme Court precedence had given them power to enter that home to effect the arrest, so why didn't they immediately enter the home to affect the arrest?

dont question me on the law, I'm 90% better educated than you on the law
 
SmarterthanYou said:
AGAIN!!!!!!!!!! just admit that you prefer the government control everything, your rights, your freedom, the concept of law.......you believe that a citizen has no rights and let the government sort it out. end of story. admit it.
Click to expand...
So your concept of "law" is sorted out in gunfights?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top