(September 24, 2020 at 12:10 pm)arewethereyet Wrote: Let's back up a minute...the cops were at the wrong address.

Seems like more than an "oops, my bad" to me.

If you are going to go with a no-knock at least make sure you are at the right place.  Seems obvious, and simple.

A very good arguement against the use of no knock warrants.

(September 24, 2020 at 11:54 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: Has it been accepted practice for the police to not announce themselves?  If it has, then the argument that they have personal calpability for not announcing themselves would seem very much a case of punishing the scapegoat because they seem easy.

Which is rather the same basic thing as racism, would you not agree?

No, it has not become accepted practice.  Police are supposed to announce themselves.  That's why they claim they did.  But eleven neighbors, and Kenneth Walker say that they did not.  Of course, the piece of shit bootlicking Attorney General decided to go with the ONE neighbor who said they did, instead of the eleven who conflicted with such statements.  Then you have the fact that the guy they were looking for, had already been arrested earlier that day.  Something they would've known if they hadn't been stupid pieces of shit.  And of course you have the 9-11 call from Walker which has him saying "Someone kicked in the door and shot my girlfriend."  (How many people call the cops on the cops?) 


Police should be held to a fucking high standard, not this bullshit low standard of "Well, they feared for their life!"  Guess who really fears for their life?  Black people EVERY FUCKING DAY.  Especially when they deal with police.  It's time we put a stop to it, and start holding them fucking accountable.

(September 24, 2020 at 12:19 pm)Divinity Wrote:

(September 24, 2020 at 11:54 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: Has it been accepted practice for the police to not announce themselves?  If it has, then the argument that they have personal calpability for not announcing themselves would seem very much a case of punishing the scapegoat because they seem easy.

Which is rather the same basic thing as racism, would you not agree?

No, it has not become accepted practice.  Police are supposed to announce themselves.  That's why they claim they did.  But eleven neighbors, and Kenneth Walker say that they did not.  Of course, the piece of shit bootlicking Attorney General decided to go with the ONE neighbor who said they did, instead of the eleven who conflicted with such statements.  Then you have the fact that the guy they were looking for, had already been arrested earlier that day.  Something they would've known if they hadn't been stupid pieces of shit.  And of course you have the 9-11 call from Walker which has him saying "Someone kicked in the door and shot my girlfriend."  (How many people call the cops on the cops?) 


Police should be held to a fucking high standard, not this bullshit low standard of "Well, they feared for their life!"  Guess who really fears for their life?  Black people EVERY FUCKING DAY.  Especially when they deal with police.  It's time we put a stop to it, and start holding them fucking accountable.

A no-knock warrant is a different kind of warrant from a regular one.

It specifies that the police do not have to announce themselves...they don't have to knock.

The element of surprise is supposed to be the reason for it.  

In using no-knocks you end up with situations like this one where the wrong house is breached and an innocent person is killed.

This is proof of the adage about the US "justice" system, "there are people that the law protects but does not bind, and there are people that the law binds but does not protect". Barbarous.

(September 24, 2020 at 12:43 pm)Nomad Wrote: This is proof of the adage about the US "justice" system, "there are people that the law protects but does not bind, and there are people that the law binds but does not protect".  Barbarous.

That is par for the course in much of the world.

In much of the world, law is the tool with which the powerful rule, not something that rules the powerful.

(September 24, 2020 at 11:24 am)Anomalocaris Wrote:

(September 24, 2020 at 11:07 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: It is the prosecutors job to convince a grand jury that there's enough for a case go to trial.  They failed.

Is there enough for a case to go forward?


That the innocent shouldn’t have to die is not enough, and in principle can not be enough, to convict those who caused the death.

If the prosecutor went to the grand jury with "the innocent shouldn't have to die" they failed.

Which is why this so-called principle of "surprise" behind no-knock is dead on arrival.

That this procedure of no-knock even exists is just another example of the patch-work of regressive laws the police operates on.

(September 24, 2020 at 8:40 am)arewethereyet Wrote:

(September 24, 2020 at 8:36 am)Brian37 Wrote: SARCASM 



"Oopps" is what you say as a restaurant worker. It is not an excuse when your job is to try to detain someone, who has not been convicted. And even worse, when your  target is based on bad info.

Not sarcasm...another of your inane comparisons.

From now on I will just say - It could have been worse...you could have gotten cold fries.

You missed my point. 

The cops shot Breonna 6 times. I don't give a shit if another cop shot also and "Endangered" the lives of other apartments. It makes no logical sense that the one cop who did not hit her, was the one charged with "Wanton endangerment". 

Breonna was an innocent victim.

It's like trying to explain an internal combustion engine to a woodchuck.

(September 25, 2020 at 11:26 am)Brian37 Wrote:

(September 24, 2020 at 8:40 am)arewethereyet Wrote: Not sarcasm...another of your inane comparisons.

From now on I will just say - It could have been worse...you could have gotten cold fries.

You missed my point. 

The cops shot Breonna 6 times. I don't give a shit if another cop shot also and "Endangered" the lives of other apartments. It makes no logical sense that the one cop who did not hit her, was the one charged with "Wanton endangerment". 

Breonna was an innocent victim.

your point has no bearing on the legal concept of culpability.

the law should not be a means for satisfying impulsive senses of righteousness, especially when it so easily seem so righteous to so many to scapegoat a few for the failings of many.   

rather it is a means of preventing impulsive sense of righteousness from carrying the day over more consistent and systematic application of behavioral mandate.