Source? That wasn't in the article, or in the Lawrence opinion. If that's true, your point is well-taken.
I've also been trying to source the comment about prior police visits to the perps home which I heard on a talk radio show (Doug Hoerth in Pgh). I can't find anything other than a vague mention of a weapons charge against one of the individuals, so I'll step down from that.
But, my two points still stand 1) had they any humility they would have stopped their sexual activity when strangers entered the room and 2)there is a strong likelihood that they wanted to be caught in order to challenge the law.
This second point is referenced in a footnote in the amicus brief filed by Shackleford for the Texas state representatives:
"2 It is rare indeed for an “anonymous” caller making a false report to conveniently wait for the police to show them directly to the room where the anal sex was occurring, knowing his identity and the false report would be discovered. These facts strongly suggest that the men engaging in anal sex desired to be “caught” by the police for the very purpose of challenging this law. It appears that petitioners’ privacy argument lacks factual merit. Pg 17 Footnote 2 "
This case has been presented as the "state" bursting, uninvited, into the privacy of a citizen's home, when in fact the entry into that home was a proper response of law enforcement acting upon a reported threat to safety.
But then that is typical of liberal activism; lies don't matter when there's an agenda at stake.