|This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.|
Locked on 05/14/2011 8:49:55 AM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
By request of poster, duplicate
Skip to comments.Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home
Posted on 05/13/2011 6:33:44 PM PDT by WildSnail
INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.
In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.
(Excerpt) Read more at nwitimes.com ...
What ever happened to the country I grew up in?
That sounds like bad law.
Time to send this case to the USSC.
Time to disbar Steven David. He’s an enemy of the Constitution.
We have Republican RINO to thanks for this judge.
“Governor Mitch Daniels has made his first pick to the Indiana Supreme Court and it is Boone Co. Circuit Court Judge Steven David.”
I think the idea is that you can solve it later in court vs having a fist or firefight each time you think the cop is entering your house illegally.
The problem is that the cop isn’t punished for doing so, the taxpayers are.
Agreed. The US Constitution trumps that state in this issue.
BOOOOOOO SHIT !!!!
I think most people would “take some offense” at anyone breaking into their home. Hoosiers...recall that worthless, putrid, Constitution-hating, Bill-of-Rights-hating judge.
Sorry, I looked but didn’t see the other post.
I’ve read this, very interesting. Based on what we know from the articles, IMO, the ruling should have centered around whether the entry was lawful. I’d say it was lawful entry as the police were in pursuit and had probable cause.
The disturbing part is the court attempted to redefine the 4th amendment with the ruling. I guess in Indiana now if someone knows the “password” police, you have to open your door. Wonder what they would think about looking at the business end of a Colt 1911 when the door opens?
Kiss my behind Indiana.
Now I see that this is the 3rd thread. The original (?) one is here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2719318/posts
Mod — pull this thread please!
I really don't care what the court says - if they ain't got a warrant, they're entering illegally and are thus subject to being killed.
Didn't the police somewhere just kill a Marine Veteran that SERVED THIS COUNTRY in Iraq? Seems that it's OK in the judge's eyes for the cops to kill people defending their property, but it's not OK for people to protect that for which they have worked.
This country is getting more and more like NAZI Germany.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2719318/posts - 165 replies.
If this is appealed, I suspect it will be overturned.
Some of us suspect that this is being fostered by Obots who are trying to get Freepers to make threats about judges.
Currently, if an LEO walks into your house uninvited, without a search warrant and finds, say, a bag of grass on your kitchen table and arrests you for possession, the case would be thrown out. No probable cause.
This is major.
What constitution? Ever hear of the TSA?
"police were called to investigate a husband and wife arguing outside their apartment.
When the couple went back inside their apartment, the husband told police they were not needed and blocked the doorway so they could not enter"
If I were a cop I probably would consider this situation as an exigent circumstance, unless the wife came to the door to confirm.
The husbands beligerant actions would arise doubts as to his demeaner.
I wonder how it it was decided that this was an illegal entry considering the circumstances.
The ruling as a broad slash at the constitution however is just plain wrong!
“All animals are equal....some are just a little more equal...”
A Democrat, no doubt.
This decision can NOT stand!
So, it's not an issue involving a cop doing something unlawful, but rather an issue where a non resident decided to physically abuse a cop otherwise lawfully occupied who just happened to be there.
The law, in general, provides that you can't just go beat up people 'cause you feel like doing it.
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT IS
STILL IN THE BILL OF RIGHTS
and still prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures
and sets out requirements for search warrants based on
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches
and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall
issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
There was no decision that the cop’s entry was unlawful. That’s simply Mr. Barne’s lawyer’s assertion.
That info was not in the source link.
Got more info?
She'd invited the cop into the apartment. The man had already informed the cop that he was not a resident of the apartment.
So, what's your complaint?
Are you just an Obot here to make FR folks look IGNANT!
I think they should call you on their cell phone and tell you they are at the front door.
That happened twice right before Mother's Day only it wasn't cops lol.
...and some people want to make this RINO the Republican nominee for president.
All the information is available to everyone who is willing to punch links.
The NW article is kind of like propaganda. There's some truth in it; the Court went out of bounds (they didn't even need to prepare a decision here); and the decision has many more factoids than the news article.
None of us agree with the decision ~ it's too broad for the sort of case involved, and it's simply hypothetical. You don't expect that sort of nonsense out of a top end court.
On the other hand there was no unlawful entry ~ just a punk POd at his estanged wife and thinking he ought to push around the cops she'd called to her apartment!
There are limits ~ and all that happened is this punk got tazered. In the old days he'd have broken bones I am sure. Ain't modern science great stuff!
Bring a body bag with you, one of us is not walking out my house alive!
If an American is unwilling to stand against this blatant disregard for your fourth amendment protections placed in the Constitution specifically to restrain the government from abusing Americans, then what in the hell will you stand up for?
It would be interesting to see SCOTUS deal with this one. Fortunately even if they get it wrong each state can provide more constitutional protection to its citizens.
Sad day for Indiana though.
Lady made a 911 call ~ that’s probable cause. The cops never need warrants in these cases.
If the cop did not have a warrant or exigent circumstances to enter, he did so unlawfully.
Seems like a great way to cover those “aw shit” moments when SWAT busts down the door.......at the wrong address.... >PS
They made the law, now try to enforce it.
I may not have the right but I do have the ability.
Go read the decision ~ the case is fully briefed in there. The guy just up and pushed a cop around. The cop appears to have been in that place lawfully having been invited there by the tenant.
But, say, let's look at this another way. Let's say your house is on fire and you call the fire department. They need to go busting in the front door to save your chilluns but they didn't bring a warrant. They bust in anyway and you pull out your AR 15 and start pumping rounds into the firemen.
Last time you did that what happened and when did you get out?
The cop was asked to come to the apartment by the woman who lived there.
That sounds like bad law.
Time to send this case to the USSC.
Yes, I hope they do that. And I hope it’s overturned. In the meantime, it’s added to the list of laws, regulations and acts that I summarily ignore because they so clearly violate the Constitution. I truly hope no one ever tests me on such matters.
Absolute and total BRAVO SIERRA.
If they have a warrant and are following constitutional law, not trampling unalienable rights, then they can enter...if they do not, then they can expect to be treated as the criminals that they would then be.
End of story...full story.
Otherwise...Lexington Green and Concord come to mind.
He was no longer a tenant ~ and had, in fact, told the cop he didn't live there.
So why is a warrant needed in this case?
Think hard. We'll give you all day to come up with some reason.
The decision is, of course, wrongly decided, but the 4th amendment hasn't got a thing to do with it.
It kind of gives new meaning to this old song:
Hope it goes to the USSC, and that the USSC is not as ignorant of the constitution. But that is also a lot to hope for these days.
Should have dug deeper...
Yep, the perp was a jerk. The trial lawyer has made a name for himself!
The judge is now infamous in many minds here...
Not your fault.
The other article is improperly posted with an incorrect title and content.
A search will not turn up articles with made up titles.
If that is true then why the non-stop posting to everyone who finds the decision disagreeable?
Probably so and if somebody calls and tells them they think you're suicidal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.