>You have no obligation to show your “papers” to any LEO if you are not suspected of having committed a crime. You do not have to prove that you aren’t a felon by showing your ID.
Indeed so; under the presumption-of-innocence mindset it’s actually the official’s obligation to show “papers” [that is, a warrant].
Maybe it’s a bit of a jerk’s stance, but I don’t like the idea of people being snapped up under the “probable cause” excuse that’s been given the police; the 4th Amendment states that WARRANTS are to be issued on probable cause, not arrests — make them do the extra effort/paperwork. They’ve lost all “benefit of the doubt” credits with me with such prevalent stories like this and the dismissal of concerns about legal contradictions (ie enforcement of laws which are expressly forbidden by the state or federal Constitution).
Warrantless entry, searches, and seizures may be done under exigent circumstances. There would be nothing inherently wrong with that, except that courts have taken it upon themselves to decide in advance that certain searches are "reasonable", despite the fact that reasonableness can only be determined given all the facts surrounding a search (and may thus only be determined with certainty by a jury).
If jurors were informed of the facts surrounding searches, and instructed that no evidence from a search they deem "unreasonable"(*) given the totality of the circumstances should be construed in a manner detrimental to the defendant, police would probably be inclined to act much more reasonably.
(*) For a search to be reasonable, the jury would have to find that (1) knowing everything the people seeking the warrant knew [including information that may not have been given to the warrant judge] a reasonable person would consider it likely that the requested search would produce evidence of a crime; (2) if exigent circumstances are claimed, a reasonable person, knowing what was known by the cops on scene, would believe them to exist; (3) a reasonable person would judge that the way in which the search was conducted minimized the risk and/or harm to persons and/or property. If cops are doing their duty, they should have no problem convincing a jury of all points; that jurors might balk at some of today's procedures is not a reason to withhold such information from them, but instead is a reason to provide it.