guy, even after it should have been clear for some time now that they made a mistake.Posted on 05/07/2008 9:13:08 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
About a month ago I got a call from a reporter for the Arkansas Times inquiring about my research into paramilitary drug raids. He'd been reporting on a raid in North Little Rock involving a 40-year-old man named Tracy Ingle. When he told me the story over the phone, I was floored, even given all the abuses and mistakes I've reported and read about over the last few years. What makes the case especially egregious is not that the police may have gotten the wrong home, that they shot a man, or that they were covering it up or going silent. We've seen all that before. What's mind-blowing about this one is that they've continued abusing the poor guy, even after it should have been clear for some time now that they made a mistake.
From the outset, it should be noted that Tracy Ingle has had some trouble with the law in the past, though nothing violent, and nothing drug-related. He has had a couple of DWI's, and a citation for failing to appear in court. He apparently also agreed to do some repair work on a friend's car that later turned out to be stolen.
That said, what's happened to him over the last few months is pretty outrageous.
Here's the Arkansas Times piece, which I'd encourage you to read in full. And here's a follow-up interview with North Little Rock Police Chief Danny Bradley about SWAT tactics.
I've since spoken again to the reporter and to Tracy Ingle's sister, Tiffney Forrester, who herself is a former sheriff's deputy. I've also had a chance to review the warrants and return sheets (pdf).
The North Little Rock Police Department wouldn't discuss the case with me.
Here's a quick rundown:
• On January 7, 2008 a paramilitary police unit in North Little Rock, Arkansas conducted a drug raid on Tracy Ingle's home. Ingle says he had fallen asleep for several hours, and was asleep when the raid happened. He awoke when the police took a battering ram to his door. Another team of officers approached form the outside of the house, and shattered the window to his bedroom.
• When he awoke, Ingle says he thought his home was being invaded by armed robbers. He reached for a broken gun, a pretty clear indication that he had no intention of killing anyone, but rather was trying to scare away the intruders. When he grabbed the gun, an officer inside the house fired his weapon. The bullet hit Ingle just above the knee, shattered his thigh bone, and nearly severed his lower leg. When the outside officers heard the shot, they opened up on Ingle, hitting him four more times. According to Ingle's sister, one bullet still rests just above Ingle's heart, and can't be removed.
• Ingle was taken to the hospital, and spent a week-and-a-half in intensive care. He was then removed from intensive care—still in his hospital pajamas—and taken to the North Little Rock police department, where he was questioned for five hours. He was not told he was suspected of a crime, and his family wasn't allowed to speak with him. After the interrogation, he was arrested and transferred to the county jail.
• Ingle spent the next four days in jail. He says he was never given his pain medication or his antibiotics. Though hospital nurses told him to change his bandages and clean his wounds every 4-6 hours, Ingle told the Arkansas Times that jail officials changed them only twice in four days. Ingle's wounds became infected during the time he was in jail.
• Police found no illegal drugs in Ingle's home. They did find a scale, which Ingle's sister tells me was an extra she was given when she worked at a medical testing facility. She used it in her jewelry-making hobby. They also found a bunch of small plastic bags. Again, Ingle's sister says these were part of her business. "I was leaving the country for a while, and I stored a lot of my stuff at his house," she told me. "The scale and bags were mine, and are both common things to have for anyone who makes jewelry." Police also found the broken gun and a broken police scanner.
• From those items, the police charged Ingle with running a drug enterprise. They also charged him with assault, for pointing his broken gun at the police officers who had just barged into his home. The judge set Ingle's bail at $250,000, explaining that it had to be set high because Ingle had engaged in a shootout with police—never mind that Ingle didn't fire a shot. Ingle was able to sell his car to pay a bail bondsman. But
with no car, his injuries render him basically immobile. He had to walk two miles on crutches and an infected leg to his hearing last week.
• The police obtained a no-knock warrant for Ingle's home about three weeks prior to the raid. The warrant itself (pdf) reads like boilerplate, with no specific references to Ingle (other than his address), or why he specifically posed a risk to police safety, or of disposing of drugs before coming to answer the door. It mentions no controlled buys. It doesn't even mention an informant. In fact, someone scratched out "crack cocaine" and hand-wrote in "methamphetamine" on the type-written warrant, suggesting a cut, plug, and paste job. The Supreme Court has ruled that police must show case-specific evidence of exigent circumstances in order to be issued a no-knock warrant. The mere fact that it's a drug case isn't enough. The warrant for Ingle's home contains no such specific information.
Many times, information specific to the investigation is contained in the affidavit the investigating officer files for the search warrant, not in the warrant itself. Forrester says she has called the North Little Rock Police Department more than 20 times in an effort to obtain a copy of the affidavits. She says they at first refused to return her phone calls. When she was finally able to speak with a lieutenant, he became angry when she told him she had contacted the media. She then says he told her to "dream on" when she asked for copies of the affidavits.
• According to Forrester, Ingle's neighbor had a direct line of sight into the bedroom, and saw the entire raid. His account initially matched Ingle's. But that changed. "We have a witness, a next door neighbor that saw the entire incident," Forrester told me. "He came forward on his own to give a statement to the family. Police never questioned him until a month or so after the shooting, at my insistence. They kept this neighbor in his home, and questioned him for at least four hours, refusing to let the man's wife come home, of for other people to see him. When the police finished intimidating the man, they told him specifically that 'he did not see what he thought he saw.' The neighbor is now afraid to talk to the media." I have not yet been able to speak with the neighbor.
• Ingle's family was able to put up $1,000 to retain an attorney, but can't afford the extra $6,000 the attorney has asked to represent Ingle. Ingle is therefore still looking for representation. He has no health insurance, and no money to pay for medication, or to continue treatment of his injuries.
• Last week, after the Arkansas Times article appeared, the judge in the case issued a gag order, preventing Ingle and any future attorney he may have from talking to the media about what happened to him. This is puzzling. Before today there had been exactly two articles about this case—not exactly a media circus. It's hard to understand why a gag order was necessary. It's only real purpose is to prevent more people from learning about what's increasingly looking like a railroading. And it's only effect is to lend more support to the possibility that it is, in fact, a cover-up and railroading.
As noted, the police aren't talking. And the prosecutor is now bound by the gag order. Perhaps there's some piece of information damning to Ingle I'm not yet aware of—though it's hard to imagine what that might be.
Barring that, what's happening to Tracy Ingle is pretty outrageous.
I hope he has a really good attorney.
the arkansas mafia is still alive
This happened in Atlanta to an elderly lady. She thought living in the rough area she lived, she was being attacked. Reached for her gun and was shot alot of times. Shame fear of drugs has caused death, when they claim they want to end drugs to avoid deaths. Stupid is as stupid does.
Anyone who thinks the war on drugs is a good idea is an idiot and certainly not a conservative.
The WOD warriors will be here soon to say the guy deserved it.
He had to walk two miles on crutches and an infected leg to his hearing last week
Doesn't this guy know anyone with a car?
I don’t believe drugs should be legalized, but I don’t think the Constitution should be gutted to fight them. These stories of abuses have been all too common over the past 20 years.
When we allowed authorities to wear ninja suits, it was all over.
bump for later
Although we had “anti-drug” laws on the books back as far as around 1910, there was no real effort to enforce the laws for many years. Until about 1935. In 1935, marijuana became illegal, and enforcement stepped up on a number of other drugs such as opiates and cocaine. Why, you might ask?
What was attempted in the United States between 1919 and 1933? Prohibition of alcohol. However noble its aims, it clearly failed. But during that time a large “crime fighting” bureaucracy was built up around enforcement of prohibition. Now, in 1933, during the depths of the Depression, this bureaucracy no longer has a mission. Since bureaucracies never die, it needed to create a new mission.
There are the roots of the war on drugs.
The American criminal justice system is nothing but a giant bloated bureaucracy of cops, courts, probation officers, prosecutors and social service providers. It is every bit as ineffective as the welfare system; it is just as big, just as expensive, and has done as much to solve criminal behavior as the welfare system ended poverty.
It exists to consume and consumes to exist. It solves nothing. And with every governmental bureaucracy, it will often abuse the individual in an exercise of the power of the state.
Anyone who calls others idiots with a broad brush is himself one.
The Revenuers were an agency without a mission.
These are the exact type of Cops I hate. Despise... They make the Nazis look nice, cause at least you KNEW the Nazis weren’t pretending to protect and defend anyone but themselves. I am a cop hater. I plead guilty. Never met one who didn’t have an ego bigger than Clinton. There are no good cops, just ones who’s own criminality hasn’t yet been exposed. But I am no WOD apologist either. Drug users and pushers need the death penalty. Publicly. Do that to every convicted dealer in every state on the same day, just once.. and you’d set bad that element a century! It is because we do not enforce draconian penalties, that we end up with draconian abuses by cops.
It’s not really that it is the cops fault.. they are just as sinful, corrupt, wicked as the next person... but as CS Lewis said so well...
Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
Cops do these abuses with the very approval of their own deluded corrupt conscience.
One that's not stolen? Doubtful.
The WOD is doing more damage than it’s preventing. Stopping dealers, no matter how desireable that may be, in no way justifies the tactics being used. Personally, I think users should be left alone. If you want to get anybody, get the dealers.
Some of them eventually figure out they're just eliminating the competition from the Chief's good old boy buddies, but the money is good, there are no standards and they get to play "I Spy".
(From another 20 year veteran of the cops and robbers biz)
No knock warrants should be immediately outlawed.
*
Amen.
I’m hoping the irony is intentional.
Anyone who can't see that those that support the war on drugs are idiots, is himself one. The war on drugs is analogous to prohibition. Anyone who can't see we are on a dangerous course, with the rights of many, many people in this country already being stomped on by so called "swat" teams who are merely looking to increase the coffers of their cities is an idiot, plain and simple. Yes, I use a broad brush because one is required to cover all the idiots who refuse, because of a sense of self righteous, and wrong headed, morality to acknowledge the war on drugs to be senseless and useless.
excellent quote of an outstanding mind
and a great unapologetic post.
out
standing!
I love you...marry me!
Are you a RuPaul supporter? Your constitutional doom and gloom is a little over the top.
Easy, take the asset seizure at the local level out of the equation. You cannot stop enforcing drug laws or legalize it. If that is your logic then we need to allow fissile material in every home. Evidently you have never been affected through crime, theft or DWI offenses by someone who is using.
statement of the Day:
Every governmental bureaucracy exists to consume and consumes to exist, solving nothing and it will often abuse the individual in an exercise of the power of the state.
Arkansas huh? Did he have some dirt on the Clintons?
On second thought, he couldn’t have, otherwise he would be dead.
We do not need swat teams in the USA, we do not need the war on drugs. We do need honest politicians(I know and oxymoron)in place so they will not take bribes. Fool yourself all you want but you will not fool me. Idiots and fools are the only ones who think the war on drugs is actually doing any good and not causing unrepairable harm to the USA.
You are the one that lives in a dream world. The WOD is being fought wrong but it is a necessary war. I love you citizens that think everything should be legal damn the consequences. They call that anarchy.
So you like asbestos, mercury in your water, unlimited illicit drugs for those that want them, pornography in schools and libraries, radioactive material in every garage... am I missing anything?
yup. There is also a huge contingent of "drug war" supporters right here on FreeRepublic.
The war on drugs is the main tool used to subvert the constitution, though the 'war on terror' is trying hard to catch up.
They can start talking to me about a "war on terror" after they close the border.
The worst I ever heard was a California case a few years ago. A 72 year old ranch owner was killed in a mistaken drug raid—bad info and no drugs—but the kicker was the emails and memos of the “legal authorities” prior to the raid.
They had the smell of big dollars in their noses via confiscation of the man’s ranch. All their their proceedings and plans were predicated on the confiscation of the property.
I presume the drug agents were not prosecuted and received medals and raises.
You need glasses! The man can’t AFFORD representation! Is everyone on this site completely out of touch with that concept? Some people ain’t rich! Why, when something like this happens, doesn’t the old America raise it’s long-lost head? You know, the America with the Lone Ranger, or Lash Larue riding over the hill to help the little guy - pro bono? Why do we have no Lawyers who can abandon the mirror long enough to roll up their sleeves and kick some crooked court-house ass? This country will soon totally reach it’s end; probably overdue.
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed freepmail me or post a message here.
Most cops over the age of 35 are fine. It's this younger breed who suffer from major SDS.
And who was in control of our government at the time of Prohibition, as well as in the 1930s when the end of Prohibition brought the roots of the WOD?
Progressives.
Some “progress”.
Sometimes Rambo is the answer.
But I won't be so indirect as your posts leave no room for doubt.
If that is your logic then we need to allow fissile material in every home.
Flippin' idiot.
Well, the article is dramatized but I’ll say this. There is little or no due process now for jackbooted thugs to conduct a raid based on circumstantial evidence. I’ll tell you my quick story:
My wife own’s a little red sports car. She is a licensed phlebotomist (draws blood at hospitals and such). She dropped a friend off in a drug neighborhood about a mile away. This friend wanted to partake as a user but my wife had nothing to do with anything but give her a ride because this friend was drunk. My wife’s license plate is ‘envein’. To stand for phlebotomy. After dropping the friend off, she pulled into the driveway. I saw a TON of blue lights pull into my driveway and I thought a neighbor had an emergency. DEA & SWAT plus a half dozen cruisers were in my driveway, on my lawn! There was three DEA’s with body army with rifles drawn behind my wife’s car. She saw all the blues, but did not see the shotguns drawn behind her. I was in my bath robe and I said, “I am unnarmed, please let me say something to my wife”. The police said “go ahead”. I told her to put her hands on the steering wheel and make no sudden moves.
I knew if my wife saw the drawn weapons she would freak and probably been shot. The police lowered there weapons. They asked me to stand back in my doorway. Then they asked her if they could search the vehicle. My wife said no problem. They of course found nothing but it illustrates the point of overreaction and lack of due process before they draw the weapons.
I would not call Calex views anarchist. Calex seems to be a Libertarian. Simple as that. I don’t know if a Libertarian government is better then a Republic.
What did we have after the Revolution? Libertarian government until the system grew more organized.
I don’t seem to see reports of mass chaos when morphine was legal, it seemed people killed themselves by being addicted. The Chinese smoked opium for decades, the Romans drank it with wine. But they did not shoot other people to get it because they were addicted as they do now.
So it’s a mixed argument and one that would not be resolved unless we became Libertarian again for a time. The ananology about nukes and radiation doesn’t really belong as such things are not easily obtainable. How about cigaretts by the way? They kill more people then all illegal drugs combined and it is legal and widely available. Suppose those, we made nicotine illegal. I would wager people would shoot someone else to get it but it’s just a hunch based on the prohibition days/20’s gangster behavior.
That indeed is a problem now isn’t it? You could say how could O.J. go free when the entire world knew he murdered Nicole Simpson but the guy who robbed the seven-eleven with a gun gets 7 years hard time. Or how about the many years child molestors who molested family members for years were given two year sentences and in some cases, probation? The land, buildings and people will still be here, but it may not be called the USA for too much longer. Perhaps more like simply America.
All of that would be preferrable to me. No contest.
No, just the things that aren't anyone else's damn business. What someone chooses to put into their own body is one of those things.
They call that anarchy.
No, they call that freedom. Something the neocons kicked out the GOP back window long ago.
The WOD is being fought wrong but it is a necessary war.
No, it is not. It is wrong on every level. It is biologically unnatural, chemically self-contradictory, socially disastrous, ethically incoherent, legally unsupported, intellectually absurd and morally bankrupt. There is not the slightest shred of evidence that it is any good, and every bit of evidence that it is not. There is only one reason to see it as workable anymore, and that is willful ignorance. And there is no place for patience left for the willfully ignorant any longer.
"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." - Ronald Reagan
“What someone chooses to put into their own body is one of those things.”
If they stayed home you are right, but they don’t. They go drive, they break into my house, they assault our wives and daughters ( and sons ), they drag down the productivity of a system that has to use illegal aliens as a labor force because they cannot get to work, they get high and get pregnant and we pay for all their babies... Shall I continue in your perfect scenario?
Ah the name calling in light of listening to an opinion and having a civil debate ( a liberal characteristic ). Shall I stoop to your level of inadequacy and insecurity... as much as I’d like to no.
Breaking and entering and assault are crimes, regardless whether the person is high, drunk, or sober. Prosecute them for breaking those laws.
they drag down the productivity of a system
People who play video games drag down productivity. So do slouches who drink beer and watch NASCAR all day long. We should enact laws against unproductive activity?
Okay libertines, live in your dream world.
Get off your high horse you idiot.
Equating drug legalization to having radioactive material in every household is idiotic.
Several of your posts were idiotic revealing idiotic opinions and idiotic thought processes.
The logical conclusion is that you are an idiot.
But I’ve often been accused of stating the obvious.
You are an arse. I am what I am by your opinion you are what you are by birth.
If all you have to do is call names then don’t post to me sonny.
OK, great. I'm glad that you agree then that breaking into someone's home to arrest someone for using is out of the question.
but they don’t.
Shall I continue in your perfect scenario?
No, it's your scenario that's "perfect". It's perfectly idealized to your sky-is-falling necessities. The truth is that, like alchohol, most people who use illegal susbtances do stay in their own home. And most of those who wander out of it don't commit any crimes of aggression.
Do some? Of course. So do some alchoholics (probably more in proportion than other drugs, I'd say). Do we bring back prohibition?
You're recycling tired, long disproven excuses to find some vain justification to control something that is not your slighest concern. If you want justification for governmental action, let me suggest one that once-upon-a-time this country believed in. It's called "habeas corpus". Instead of falling back on cartoonish Reefer Madness scare tactics, prove that someone, individually, is a threat.
Until you do, what someone chooses to put into their body remains none of your damn business. And, unless you can show me the justification in the Constitution (take as long as you want), none of the federal government's, either.
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.