Posted on 10/31/2019 12:31:05 PM PDT by OddLane
An armed shoplifting suspect in Colorado barricaded himself in a stranger's suburban Denver home in June 2015. In an attempt to force the suspect out, law enforcement blew up walls with explosives, fired tear gas and drove a military-style armored vehicle through the property's doors.
After an hours-long siege, the home was left with shredded walls and blown-out windows. In some parts of the interior, the wood framing was exposed amid a mountain of debris.
A federal appeals court in Denver ruled this week that the homeowner, who had no connection to the suspect, isn't entitled to be compensated, because the police were acting to preserve the safety of the public.
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
bookmark
“Who will of course reassess the value of the house “
Yep! The value of his house is triple that of the old house!
Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts.
Why Have So Many People Never Heard Of The MOVE Bombing? (click here)
Excerpt:
"After my stories last week on the 30th anniversary of the MOVE siege in West Philadelphia in 1985, in which Philadelphia police dropped a bomb on a residential neighborhood, leaving 11 dead — including five children — we were surprised by how many people told us they'd never heard of the bombing."(I watched this on local TV as it was developing, back in 1985.)
I’ll contribute to help rebuild the guy’s house, and to buy a rope for the judge.
ML/NJ
“So the owner can sue the crook “
He already accepted the insurance.
Hard to understand how launching projectiles into a home is perfectly safe...
“No idea if that’s in play here”
Insurance paid to restore old house. He chose to rebuild a new luxury house.
“Their progeny prefer not to fight”
Apparently not
“The police could at least pay the deductible.”
They offered to pay the deductible plus $5000.
” 100 officers for a shoplifter.”
High on meth he tried to run down a cop and then unprovoked started shooting at them when caught trying to steal a car.
When they entered the house he started shooting through the walls at them.
Never said that. Refers only to the locality occupied by the sniper.
. . . does that mean you're also cool with folks taking potshots at the occupying army?
Exactly opposite of the point I was making. Don't be silly.
What is your problem>
You don’t blow up someone’s house for damn shoplifter who took a shirt!!!
Legally, the responsibility for the damage to the home probably lies with the suspect, not the police. That doesn’t make the homeowner any happier because the suspect probably doesn’t have any money to pay for the damage, but that’s likely what the law says about a case like this.
“I’ll contribute to help rebuild the guy’s house,”
You obviously don’t know the whole story!
Insurance paid for his old 1974 relic to the tune of $345k plus police paid the deductible.
He then built a new luxury home for $900k!
You can mail your check to:
4219 S Alton St.
Greenwood Village, CO
“You don’t blow up someone’s house for damn shoplifter who took a shirt!!!”
ROTFLMAO!
High on meth, multiple counts of attempted murder and attempted car theft!
The owner is very happy! See my #115.
You know the RATS are licking their chops at this news.
He probably did have insurance, but will that policy cover police action or however the insurance company would define it in there own list of exclusions.
I can see the insurance company covering fire, tornadoes & other storms, vandalism - but police action?
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.