Raid a house, kick a dog, plug a suspect

Worldnet Daily ^ | February 22, 2002 | Joel Miller

[bloggerjohn]

A family in Pueblo, Colo., is suing the DEA and the Colorado Bureau of Investigations after a no-knock raid resulted in their two sons being arrested and jailed despite the fact no drugs were found on the premises.

According to the suit, "black-masked, black-helmeted men brandishing automatic weapons and wearing all-black uniforms with no insignias suddenly burst into the house unannounced, kicked the family's dog across the floor, ordered the entire family to 'get on the [expletive] floor,' held them at gunpoint, searched the house, found no drugs or contraband, but nevertheless carted off the family's two sons, Dave and Marcos, and imprisoned them illegally and without charges."

The ACLU of Colorado filed the suit for the family, according to the Feb. 21 Rocky Mountain News. Court documents date the raid Aug. 19, 2000.

"The next thing we knew," said Dan Unis, the father of the family and a Pueblo County social worker, "there were five or six police with masks and automatic weapons and stuff yelling at us. It wasn't the nicest language in the world. I see my dog go flying across the room because one of them kicked it."

Unis said he asked them for a warrant, but "they couldn't produce one."

So far, neither the DEA nor the CBI have had anything to say about the case. But Mark Silverstein, ACLU legal director, said this: "Once again the war on drugs misses the target and instead scores a direct hit on the Constitution. These government agents had no search warrant, no arrest warrant and no lawful authority whatsoever. They carried out this armed home invasion in flagrant disregard of the Fourth Amendment, which forbids unreasonable searches and arrests without probable cause."

"I think it was a bunch of cowboys out having a good time," said Unis. "It was totally unnecessary." And unconstitutional. Police cannot arrest and jail people for days at a time without filing charges; it's called illegal detention.

While being unconstitutional and unnecessary, many such raids are also foolhardy and deadly.

Officers of the six-county Capital Area Narcotics Task Force, one of 49 federally funded, multijurisdictional narcotics teams operating in Texas, "were accused of mistaking ragweed for marijuana in May when they raided a Spicewood home and held residents at gunpoint as they ransacked the property and [somebody call PETA] kicked the homeowner's dog," according to a Feb. 4, Austin American-Statesman article. That version of the story, taken from court documents, is denied by the taskforce overseer, but of late CANTF hasn't had much luck in being safe.

Tony Martinez, 19 and unarmed, was killed by taskforce officers during a raid on a mobile home in Del Valle, Texas, Dec. 2001. He wasn't even the target of the raid.

Deputy Keith Ruiz was shot dead during a drug raid while breaking down the door of a different Del Valle mobile home Feb. 15, 2001. Thinking there were burglars outside, Edwin Delamore, 21, fired from inside and killed Ruiz. He's now charged with capital murder.

When Jacqueline Paasch was stirred out of bed at 6:30 a.m., April 7, 2000, by a commotion downstairs in her West Milwaukee home, she probably didn't expect to be gunned down. But, as the Feb. 7 Milwaukee Journal Sentinel tells the story, based on an anonymous tip about "possible drug activity at a home in the 1700 block of S. 54th St., and then finding marijuana seeds in a garbage receptacle near the home," a tactical unit of the Milwaukee County Sheriff's Department burst into Paasch's home and shot her.

Paasch, who was hit in the left leg, now has limited use of her toes and needs a brace for walking long distances. The city denies any wrongdoing but did recently agree to pay $700,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by Paasch.

The settlement, said Paasch's attorney, Mark Thomsen, "reflects the reality that the county could not reasonably justify the shooting."

The same could be said about the settlement for the Sepulveda family of Modesto, Calif., though it was dramatically smaller. Eleven-year-old Alberto Sepulveda was shot dead during a Sept. 13, 2000, SWAT raid that targeted the boy's father. An officer on the scene accidentally squeezed off a shot, killing the boy instantly. Last month, the family settled a federal lawsuit over the death.

The only question that remains: Can $450,000 replace Alberto?

If we didn't have so many unconstitutional and reckless drug raids, such a question would never have to be answered.

[bloggerjohn]

Older article, but I just got it, and it really made me mad. Need to vent.

[goldstategop]

The WOD results in the government copying the drug dealers in an effort to shut them down. In other words, with illegal raids and seizures, the government is marking its territory as the biggest and baddest gang on the block.

[eno_]

The right answer is to put the officers' names and pictures on the Internet so that anyone who thinks of hiring or promoting them will get splashed with the stink from this botched raid. If enough people's careers get ruined, this stuff will stop. That is the way with any kind of government employee.

[Joe Brower]

[Doctor Stochastic]

"Once again the war on drugs misses the target and instead scores a direct hit on the Constitution. These government agents had no search warrant, no arrest warrant and no lawful authority whatsoever. They carried out this armed home invasion in flagrant disregard of the Fourth Amendment, which forbids unreasonable searches and arrests without probable cause."

Once again I must disagree with the ACLU here. The intended target was hit.

[AAABEST]

The right answer is to put the officers' names and pictures on the Internet so that anyone who thinks of hiring or promoting them will get splashed with the stink from this botched raid. If enough people's careers get ruined, this stuff will stop. That is the way with any kind of government employee.

That's a great idea.

[goldstategop]

Really? Try having armed goons without warrants break into your house at 2 AM in the morning and ransack it and hold your wife and kids hostage at gun point while you're quaking in terror for your life and then state you still disagree with the ACLU that the government acted like a gang on the rampage to settle a score.

[Darth Sidious]

"If you want a picture of freedom, imagine a gun in the face of a jack-booted thug... before his lights go out forever."

-- Darth Sidious, 2002

[goldstategop]

Especially one that looks sorta legit. Except when you get right down to it, a thug's still a thug.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Perhaps I'm not being clear here. The target is the Constitution.

[Darth Sidious]

Something has begun dawning upon my once-innocent intellect of late: that our remaining a free people in spirit and soul is dependent, however loathsome the prospect is, of potentially taking the life of an oppressor and to do so without apology, if need be.

To deprive a soul of the life God gave him is the ultimate failure: it means that every other recourse has been expended, leaving nothing else but this final, most extreme measure. That thought haunts everyone of conscience. But a free person of conscience understands that however wretched that act is, it must remain a necessary option to maintain that freedom... the ultimate "damned if you do, and damned if you don't."

The Second Amendment has one purpose: to remind people that they can be killed - no matter their station or position - if they try to deprive others of freedom. We shouldn't be afraid to admit so, either.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Doctor Stochastic's point was that the "intended target" was the Constitution. And the DEA scored a direct hit.

Know what the ATF derisively calls Patriot and Militia groups whom they keep under surveillance?

"Constitution fanatics".

[goldstategop]

I couldn't agree with you and Doctor Stochastic more there. The point is when the government behaves like an outlaw to catch the outlaws, it becomes one itself.

[Teacher317]

I think he means that they hit the Constitution, and that it was their intended target. The minor detail that some family was inconvenienced hardly matters to a no-knock, warrant-less, charge-less arrest. They proved they are the un-challenge-able BMOC, and are happily reading about our frustrations over it.

[Doctor Stochastic]

The ACLU missed the point. They (poor naive fools) seem to think that the target is the criminals. One can target criminals (as is done in murder, for example) but we rarely see no-knock search warrants, warrantless searches, etc. in murder cases.

[GeorgeHL]

Isn't this exactly what the SS and the Gestapo and the Brown shirts did in Germany in the middle 30s?? The whole DEA should be dissolved and let the local police obtain search warrants before they storm troop into a private home. If a warrant isn't served they should be instantly fired and place under arrest for breaking the law just like everyone else.

[goldstategop]

My thoughts exactly.

[goldstategop]

No we don't. Its a commentary on the state of the laws in this country that hardened murderers receive more protections than law abiding folks like yours and mine. Q.E.D.

[Wolfie]

The woman who lost the use of her toes got $700,000, while a widow in Tenn. only got $400,000 after cops killed her husband during a mistaken address drug raid. Folks, look for the good lawyers, its worth it.