You’re bending over backwards to defend the indefensible murder of a man in his home.>>>>>>>>
I agree. Every person has a right under the Constitution to be safe from unreasonable search and seizure. A man standing with a weapon in defense of his own home, is exactly what his right was. He did not fire his weapon. It certainly appears as if a federal crime has been committed, a violation of his civil rights and his rights under the 4th amendment:
“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.”
I’d say this was a prima facie unreasonable search. They executed the guy, for holding a weapon in his own home when unidentified people were bashing his door down.All they likely had to do is ring the door bell and ask if they could come in, showing him their warrant, and serving him with a copy.
I agree with Tiger.
There is a lot here that does not seem to make sense, unless there was an over reaching of granted search authorization. This is like Ruby Ridge and WACO.I don’t give a damn if the PIMA County sheriff is a good old boy and a conservative. The Bill of Rights still applies.
For instance you say: Every person has a right under the Constitution to be safe from unreasonable search and seizure.
However the article states: Jose Guerena, 26, his older brother, Alejandro Guerena, and Jose Celaya - a relative by marriage - were listed as suspects in an investigation of drug trafficking and home invasions, records show.
and
During a briefing before the warrants were served, records show, detectives told SWAT team members the two Guerena brothers and Celaya were associated with a double homicide related to a home invasion.
The way the law works, search warrents were issued by a Judge based on this kind of information and maybe more we still don't know of - so how can this possibly be "unreasonable search and seizure"?
IMO the whole thing comes down to unreasonable use of no-knock warrants and SWAT teams. They should only be used where life and limb are in immediate danger. This case falls far short of that. He could have been detained during or after his 12 hour night shift at the mine where he would have been unarmed and dead tired. His wife and two young children could have also been detained after leaving the house with the added benefit of using the opportunity to ask her if anyone else was there.
This was the epitome of lazy, sloppy police work that apparently didn't employ even the simplest surveillance or background research before conducting a half-assed dynamic entry. If you have seen the video of their entry I think you'll agree that they aren't trained well enough to handle a barking dog call.