|
Forum: Internet Links Topic: 4th Amendment dead in Indiana started by: GORDON Posted by GORDON on May 13 2011,15:38
< http://www.nwitimes.com/news....97.html >
Posted by Malcolm on May 13 2011,16:03
QUOTE The court's decision stems from a Vanderburgh County case in which police were called to investigate a husband and wife arguing outside their apartment. When the couple went back inside their apartment, the husband told police they were not needed and blocked the doorway so they could not enter. When an officer entered anyway, the husband shoved the officer against a wall. A second officer then used a stun gun on the husband and arrested him. I'm sure that was totally warranted. But this ... QUOTE "We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David said. "We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest." ... is by far the most disturbing part. We'd still be British subjects taking it up the ass from the king if pussies like this were in charge back in the day. So, Dave, what is compatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence? I mean ... QUOTE The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures... ... leaves little room for interpretation unless you're weaseling the "unreasonable" part. Just for future reference, "unreasonable" != "illegal." Good to know. Posted by TheCatt on May 13 2011,16:41
I.... pretty much agree with Malcolm. The way the ruling was worded was insane. But it also sounds like they had reason to enter. It's not like I can set on my porch smoking crack, then just go inside if the police arrive. Posted by Leisher on May 13 2011,18:59
Catt and Malcolm are correct that the cops had been given the right to enter the house when they were called. (Only based on what was told to us.) They're liable for any injury/crime that occurs if they just leave the scene of a crime or reported disturbance without ensuring things are "settled" for ALL parties. If they felt the wife was still in danger, they couldn't leave, by law. So it's a situation of they're damned if they do and damned if they don't.However, I also completely disagree with the court's wording. A cop should NEVER just be allowed to enter a home without justification. Never. Never. Never. Justification in this case was that the cops (we assume) felt that the situation was not resolved and were following it to where it moved, inside the house. However, if a car is broken into down the street, the cops shouldn't have the right to randomly search houses or worse still, just walk around going into houses looking for crimes. |