Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2719318/posts



Skip to comments.

Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home
NWI Times ^ | Friday, May 13, 2011 3:56 pm | Dan Carden

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 ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: constitution; fourthamendment; liberaljudges
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-82 next last
The Indiana Supreme Court has apparently decided that the 4th amendment should join selected other parts of the Constitution on the bathroom tissue roll. Maybe they should just declare the entire Constitution unconstitutional and be done with it.

What ever happened to the country I grew up in?

1 posted on 05/13/2011 6:33:47 PM PDT by WildSnail
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

That sounds like bad law.

Time to send this case to the USSC.


2 posted on 05/13/2011 6:37:21 PM PDT by MediaMole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

Time to disbar Steven David. He’s an enemy of the Constitution.


3 posted on 05/13/2011 6:39:27 PM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

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.”


4 posted on 05/13/2011 6:39:41 PM PDT by WaterBoard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MediaMole

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.


5 posted on 05/13/2011 6:39:44 PM PDT by mewykwistmas (Lost your job as a birther under Obama? Become a 'deather'! Where's Bin Laden's death certificate?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

Agreed. The US Constitution trumps that state in this issue.


6 posted on 05/13/2011 6:43:18 PM PDT by svcw (Non forgiveness is like holding a hot coal thinking the other person will be blistered)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail; muawiyah
Another FR thread posted HERE.
7 posted on 05/13/2011 6:43:18 PM PDT by Zuben Elgenubi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail
" ... 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."

BOOOOOOO SHIT !!!!

8 posted on 05/13/2011 6:44:42 PM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mewykwistmas

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.


9 posted on 05/13/2011 6:44:52 PM PDT by hal ogen (1st amendment or reeducation camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Zuben Elgenubi; All

Sorry, I looked but didn’t see the other post.


10 posted on 05/13/2011 6:45:11 PM PDT by WildSnail (The US government now has more control over the people than the old Soviet Union ever dreamed of)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

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?


11 posted on 05/13/2011 6:47:05 PM PDT by IamConservative (The Bin Laden Cocktail: 2 shots and a splash.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

Kiss my behind Indiana.


12 posted on 05/13/2011 6:47:21 PM PDT by Drango (NO-vember is payback for April 15th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail
Well, hey. Always a bright side. Now the cops can break into your house illegally, find some probable cause, and charge you with something, anything, to justify their criminal trespass.
13 posted on 05/13/2011 6:49:11 PM PDT by HeartlandOfAmerica (Insane, Corrupt Democrats or Stupid, Spineless Republicans - Pick America's poison.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail; Admin Moderator; All

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!


14 posted on 05/13/2011 6:50:07 PM PDT by WildSnail (The US government now has more control over the people than the old Soviet Union ever dreamed of)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MediaMole

Agree!


15 posted on 05/13/2011 6:52:10 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mewykwistmas
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.

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.

16 posted on 05/13/2011 6:53:32 PM PDT by meyer (We will not sit down and shut up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2719318/posts - 165 replies.

If this is appealed, I suspect it will be overturned.


17 posted on 05/13/2011 6:53:33 PM PDT by upchuck (Think you know hardship? Ha! Wait till the dollar is no longer the world's reserve currency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail
THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER THREADS.

Some of us suspect that this is being fostered by Obots who are trying to get Freepers to make threats about judges.

18 posted on 05/13/2011 6:53:50 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FReepers
Why Yes, Mr Obama, We DO Want A Moat Filled With Alligators


Alligators at Fort Pulaski

Support FR

19 posted on 05/13/2011 6:54:07 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

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.


20 posted on 05/13/2011 6:55:12 PM PDT by Signalman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: svcw

What constitution? Ever hear of the TSA?


21 posted on 05/13/2011 6:55:56 PM PDT by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail
From the article:

"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!

22 posted on 05/13/2011 6:56:57 PM PDT by NYTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mewykwistmas

“All animals are equal....some are just a little more equal...”


23 posted on 05/13/2011 6:58:47 PM PDT by Crim (Palin / West '12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

A Democrat, no doubt.


24 posted on 05/13/2011 7:00:38 PM PDT by wastedyears (SEAL SIX makes me proud to have been playing SOCOM since 2003.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

This decision can NOT stand!


25 posted on 05/13/2011 7:02:11 PM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meyer
The cop was invited in by the woman ~ a resident there. He didn't need a warrant to enter under that condition. The man had already informed the cop that he'd moved out ~ which mean he was no longer a resident.

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.

26 posted on 05/13/2011 7:04:29 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

Yeah... no!

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
probable cause.

“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.”


27 posted on 05/13/2011 7:04:58 PM PDT by Jo Nuvark (Those who bless Israel will be blessed, those who curse Israel will be cursed. Gen 12:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYTexan

There was no decision that the cop’s entry was unlawful. That’s simply Mr. Barne’s lawyer’s assertion.


28 posted on 05/13/2011 7:06:44 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

That info was not in the source link.

Got more info?


29 posted on 05/13/2011 7:08:06 PM PDT by NYTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Jo Nuvark
Hmm ~ you haven't read the case yet. There was no search involved. Turned out there was a "seizure of a person" ~ an arrest ~ because he attacked a cop in a woman's apartment.

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!

30 posted on 05/13/2011 7:09:15 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail
Seems wrong to me, should have a warrant and probable cause. Remember about all the fuss to get warrants in a hurry for terrorists?

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.

31 posted on 05/13/2011 7:12:33 PM PDT by Aliska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WaterBoard

...and some people want to make this RINO the Republican nominee for president.


32 posted on 05/13/2011 7:12:54 PM PDT by Yet_Again
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NYTexan
If we are talking about NW News that link has a reference to the decision. You click that. That takes you to a PDF that has the text.

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!

33 posted on 05/13/2011 7:13:57 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail
That will be a long day in any Offices day that actually believes that he or she can enter my house without a warrant and the big laugh: “by force!”

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?

34 posted on 05/13/2011 7:13:57 PM PDT by paratrooper82 (We are kicking Ass in Afghanistan, soon we will be home to kick some more Asses in Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MediaMole

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.


35 posted on 05/13/2011 7:14:03 PM PDT by Clump (the tree of liberty is withering like a stricken fig tree)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Aliska

Lady made a 911 call ~ that’s probable cause. The cops never need warrants in these cases.


36 posted on 05/13/2011 7:14:57 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
“There was no decision that the cop’s entry was unlawful. That’s simply Mr. Barne’s lawyer’s assertion.”

If the cop did not have a warrant or exigent circumstances to enter, he did so unlawfully.

37 posted on 05/13/2011 7:16:46 PM PDT by paratrooper82 (We are kicking Ass in Afghanistan, soon we will be home to kick some more Asses in Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

Seems like a great way to cover those “aw shit” moments when SWAT busts down the door.......at the wrong address.... >PS


38 posted on 05/13/2011 7:17:01 PM PDT by PiperShade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

They made the law, now try to enforce it.


39 posted on 05/13/2011 7:17:46 PM PDT by jmacusa (Two wrongs don't make a right. But they can make it interesting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail
To paraphrase Ron White and turn it around;

I may not have the right but I do have the ability.

40 posted on 05/13/2011 7:19:39 PM PDT by TigersEye (Who crashed the markets on 9/15/08 and why?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paratrooper82
There was what?

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?

41 posted on 05/13/2011 7:20:13 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: paratrooper82

The cop was asked to come to the apartment by the woman who lived there.


42 posted on 05/13/2011 7:21:09 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: MediaMole

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.


43 posted on 05/13/2011 7:22:11 PM PDT by patriot preacher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail; Travis McGee; Noumenon; Lurker; Eaker; B4Ranch; MileHi; betty boop; joanie-f; Dukie

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.


44 posted on 05/13/2011 7:23:09 PM PDT by Jeff Head (Liberty is not free. Never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
The cop was invited in by the tenant. She had made a 911 call earlier. She begged the perp to NOT try to stop the officer(s).

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.

45 posted on 05/13/2011 7:26:27 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail

It kind of gives new meaning to this old song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaQZcK_IS40

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.


46 posted on 05/13/2011 7:27:34 PM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

DOH!

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...


47 posted on 05/13/2011 7:30:11 PM PDT by NYTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: WildSnail
Sorry, I looked but didn’t see the other post.

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.


48 posted on 05/13/2011 7:30:34 PM PDT by Iron Munro (Every day we now throw away things people will kill for after TEOTWAWKI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
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.

If that is true then why the non-stop posting to everyone who finds the decision disagreeable?

49 posted on 05/13/2011 7:30:49 PM PDT by TigersEye (Who crashed the markets on 9/15/08 and why?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Lady made a 911 call ~ that’s probable cause. The cops never need warrants in these cases.

Probably so and if somebody calls and tells them they think you're suicidal.

50 posted on 05/13/2011 7:36:59 PM PDT by Aliska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-82 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson