Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Crystal Palace East

The point being the government could make an argument for an exigent need, but that doesn’t relieve them of the their obligations to follow both due process and to conpenastion requirements.


78 posted on 07/04/2015 8:44:05 PM PDT by BlueNgold (May I suggest a very nice 1788 Article V with your supper...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]


To: BlueNgold

The applicable due process is to be judged dependent upon the circumstances. The cops had no time nor requirement to get a warrant.

Damages? Yes, fix the door, although the damage to the door is the sole and direct result of the homeowner’s refusal to open it.

A smart city would give him a new door. The driving problem here is that all the damages were caused by the homeowner’s refusals, not the LEO’s legal needs nor actions.

Had the homeowner simply opened the door and made his legal arguments later, none of this would have happened. Any legal arguments would have failed, however, as the LEOs had a legal right to entry under an exigent circumstances provision.


85 posted on 07/04/2015 11:57:25 PM PDT by Crystal Palace East (90% of MSM is lies, except the National Enquirer, of course :))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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