As sheriffs executed the warrant at the studio...
the deputy saying, "or we can detain you for six hours while we get a warrant and go to your house and shoot your dog."
So they had a warrant but needed to detain the owner while they went to GET a warrant.
Whiskeytangofoxtrot?
Probably they had a warrant for the studio but not the house. They were trying to convince him to let them search the house voluntarily, and threatening him that if he didn’t consent, they would come back with a warrant, search anyways, and shoot the dog.
I’m no lawyer, but that sure sounds like some form of extortion to me.
It sounds like they had a warrant for the studio, but not the guy’s home.
So instead of procuring a legal warrant to do so, they threaten the poor guy.
I wonder if the actions of these cops will be defended by any of the usual cop defenders?