Enforcement Actions in Boston

[dejet]

That does not answer the question. A warrant as JMC will know should have probable cause and be limited in scope. You can not give a warrant out for a fucking area. That simple, I would love to see an answer from a cop or someone who understands the law. Am I wrong in this?

Dont side step the question, based off the law, could you in fact have got a warrant to search the area? I really think the answer is no.

Hell if a person owns a car and is not parked on the property they need to get another warrant search lol

[Eurell]

That does not answer the question. A warrant as JMC will know should have probable cause and be limited in scope. You can not give a warrant out for a fucking area. That simple, I would love to see an answer from a cop or someone who understands the law. Am I wrong in this?

Dont side step the question, based off the law, could you in fact have got a warrant to search the area? I really think the answer is no.

Hell if a person owns a car and is not parked on the property they need to get another warrant search lol

I really hope people are not raving about violated rights because of some MJ, considering possession in MA is a civil and not a criminal offense.

Also I have not heard a single person say no to any searches, and even if they did all it would accomplish is adding 2 mins to the overall search that the police would make anyways. You say no, and there would be a search warrant executed 2 minutes later.

For those who are asking about how far the search extends in pursuit of a suspect, you should look at the relatively new Domer case. That manhunt spanned hundreds of square miles which hundreds if not thousands of homes were searched during that time frame looking for that guy and he was (in terms of firepower) was a bit less dangerous than these two. It all depends on how much ground you believe the suspect can cover and by what means does he have to cover that distance. A suspect on foot who's hauling can cover a fairly large distance in a short amount of time. Ever seen a crackhead run?

To break it down a bit more, I'll use myself as an example. I average about a mile every 6-7 minutes and I'm fairly old and fat and I smoke. Imagine if I took off running through an area where I might be somewhat familiar like a heavily populated urban area and I'm running away from the dragnet. Think about your own house for a second. How many places on the outside can you hide an average sized person? Now do a systematic search of the exterior of your house and time how long it takes for you to do it. Should take no more than 2 minutes. Now leave a window open or a door unlocked which could potentially have a person run inside. It takes (on average) 3 minutes to clear a single story house not including any crawl spaces or garages. 7 minutes tops for a full breakdown plus a thermal scan.

So lets say the police were doing quick sweeps and it takes on average about 5 minutes to clear an average sized property (house plus yard, maybe 1/4 of an acre or so). Now times that by 30 houses in a cluster with random cars, boats, RV's, sheds, tree houses, dog houses, anywhere you think you can hide a person. For every house you hit that the suspect isn't there, that tacks on about 8/10ths of a mile on to your perimeter. That's police logic right there. Unless your coming in with a full broad evolving perimeter that starts on the outskirts of your perimeter and works its way in. The perimeter starts about 3 miles from last contact and full sweeps spiraling inwards (like a massive circle). How many 30 house clusters do you think you can fit in a 3 mile radius? 5? 10? So about 300 homes inside that perimeter on average 5 minutes per house you're taking about 1500 minutes or around 25 hours to completely sweep that area for the suspect.

But what if you're wrong? What if he slips the perimeter? Well you gotta expand. Add more time on to that and more resources. If it were a perfect world, this wouldn't happen but in order to do something like that (make a perfect perimeter where no one could escape) and you'd probably need around 100,000 cops to keep it tight enough so that no one could get through.

And while granted I'm an advocate for peoples rights, I don't see how this case is such a huge deal and "infriges" on peoples rights. Like I mentioned before, people are trying to feed off the publicity that a terror suspect was captured to make a name for themselves by nitpicking the little things. Not one person who was in that city at that time is complaining that the police came in to their house looking for the guy. So all those complaining are third and fourth party people who have no real case or no real evidence that anyone's rights were violated (mostly since the people involved sure aren't complaining). How can you blame the police for doing everything they can and being completely thorough in their search for a very dangerous person? What if they never caught the guy and he killed more people? Then people would be blaming the police for not doing their jobs completely and we'd have a whole new issue to discuss.

Exigent Circumstances and Fresh Pursuit circumvent the law for a reason. The test of time has proven people (in general) can't be trusted because people keep getting hurt or killed in these incidents. And guess who gets killed a lot? The police! Why do you think everyone who was part of any mass shooting that was seen coming out of the hot zone was handcuffed and frisked? Because the past has shown suspects try to blend in with the crowds and slip away or blend in to kill more people. The police don't want to infringe upon your rights or violate you. They wanna catch the badguys. Just be happy the guy was caught and stop making it a bigger deal than it is.

Looks like you already got answered a couple of times.

[dejet]

Never heard of Exigent circumstance, ill have to read into that and stand corrected if that truly falls here. JMC's I loved what you did and how you gave us information, but that answer kinda scares me that you just said "who cares we could of got one anways". Nephlite at least showed me something that seems to prove that there was a legal standing.

[Nephlite]

Never heard of Exigent circumstance, ill have to read into that and stand corrected if that truly falls here. JMC's I loved what you did and how you gave us information, but that answer kinda scares me that you just said "who cares we could of got one anways". Nephlite at least showed me something that seems to prove that there was a legal standing.

What part scared you? The warrant in two minutes or the "who cares" portion?

Frankly, I would have happily violated every single persons rights in that city to catch this guy. Deal with the consequences later. I'm no lawyer and what I know of the law is limited to my own experiences or what I thought to read up on. But I do know no jury in America would convict a police officer or throw out a case when you're in fresh pursuit of a terrorist who just killed people. Oh sure when I get arrested or put under investigation by the DOJ, my case might be upheld. Can't do something good in this country without some equally bad repercussion. But I would much rather be judged by 12 than be carried out by 12. Would happily go to jail or loose my job because I took a killer off the streets. My case will be protected though. There are years and years of case law and legal loopholes that will keep the perpetrator behind bars.

The warrant in two minutes doesn't surprise me. I'm sure the FBI knew who the kid was before the first bullet was fired. All this "new info" coming out about how the family was on the Terror Watchlist and had prior contacts with the FBI and Interpol, they probably knew him within the first 6 hours. I know in some states (Virginia in particular since it is also a commonwealth), there's 24/7 magistrates and DA's on call for emergencies like this. Call one of em up and they'll get your warrant within minutes. All they have to do is fax a copy to you and you're golden. With technology the way it is nowadays, you could just snap a picture of the suspect with your iPhone and his picture links to the warrant then have him put his thumb print on your Fingerprint Scanner app and electronically sign it. You're off to jail within minutes. Hell you don't even NEED a paper warrant anymore. As long as there is a processing number in NCIC you're golden. Jmc could probably answer better than I do but it's not very hard in some states. In D.C. a judge or magistrate isn't going to be available 24/7 so unless it's a case like this, you'll have to wait for business hours and even then it's rare. Hell even the process of releasing prisoners on citations is automated now. No more booking magistrate at central anymore.

[dejet]

Frankly, I would have happily violated every single persons rights in that city to catch this guy.

I don't even know what to say to this. I am guessing most here don't agree with me so I am done.

A statement like that is why some people do not trust cops. If you think you can pick and choose when to uphold rights you are out of your mind.

You are there to uphold it not make it or do what you think is right.

edit: For the record I trust most cops, the ones I know are really proud of what they do and I would trust them nearly all the time. Also Iv never heard one of them say"id violated a persons right"

[Nephlite]

I don't even know what to say to this. I am guessing most here don't agree with me so I am done.

A statement like that is why some people do not trust cops. If you think you can pick and choose when to uphold rights you are out of your mind.

You are there to uphold it not make it or do what you think is right.

You're saying you don't wrestle with right and wrong every day? Of course you do. Ignoring a homeless person on the corner begging for change, is that morally wrong or ethically do you not support the giving of alms to a stranger or a beggar? How about that guy you cut off earlier today going to work because he tailgated you and you got angry and had a hint of road rage. Is it wrong when he over-compensates to avoid you and crashes, potentially dying or is it just karma and you're not at fault because he was the asshole and you had to teach him a lesson?

I just happen to choose it on a much grander scale than you do. That is why there are some people who can't become a police officer or join the military. They can't (or won't) make the kind of decisions that need to be made in order to protect or save people. I would make that decision without hesitation and without regret instantly. You can't afford to weigh moral and ethical standing at that moment. You have to make that decision in an instant. To do so could mean more lives or to not do so could mean your life. Trust cops? Hell the government makes these kinds of decisions every day and you trust them? Sorry if I value life over words on a piece of paper or what people think of me. Quite honestly I could care less about opinions. I sleep comfortable at night knowing what I do is part of that thin blue line that potentially saved countless lives that day in Watertown. Thanks be to those who have the balls to do it.

[quannum]

it's pretty funny to see how cops think.

[Tyrath]

it's pretty interesting to see how cops think.

FTFY. I don't see how it's funny.

[Zeb]

Excuse me if I missed this, but why do the cops even have to search every house. Can they not take the homeowner's word that the suspect is not inside the domicile?

[Xantavia]

In D.C. a judge or magistrate isn't going to be available 24/7 so unless it's a case like this, you'll have to wait for business hours and even then it's rare. Hell even the process of releasing prisoners on citations is automated now. No more booking magistrate at central anymore.

I actually find this more worrisome than anything else. To me, D.C. being the center of law in this country, they should be available at all times. If I'm expected to work long days or come in if there is a problem (I work at a theatre), it doesn't sit right to be like "nope, gotta spend another day in jail. I punched out."

[jmc]

Excuse me if I missed this, but why do the cops even have to search every house. Can they not take the homeowner's word that the suspect is not inside the domicile?

Sadly, we could not just take someone's word for it. Considering we knew nothing about any affiliates they may have had in this town.

There were so many other places to drive into, so many other places to stop along the way. Yet they stopped in this one town, why?

Did they have someone willing to hide them?

Did they have some safe house?

Did they already have a family held hostage, or a house rigged to blow?

No one knew anything, so had to treat everything as a possible hostile environment.

[Abandon]

Excuse me if I missed this, but why do the cops even have to search every house. Can they not take the homeowner's word that the suspect is not inside the domicile?

this might be the dumbest question asked here in a while

[mallister]

and that's saying something.

[Ksandra]

No, but seriously. Why do they take scans when boarding a plane? Couldn't they just take everyone's word that there is nothing in their luggage?

[Nephlite]

edit: For the record I trust most cops, the ones I know are really proud of what they do and I would trust them nearly all the time. Also Iv never heard one of them say"id violated a persons right"

Don't get me wrong. I wrote what I meant in reference to this incident where if I were looking for a killer, I would do it without hesitation. It probably wouldn't even occur to me that I just violated someones rights by kicking in their door because, I'm looking for a killer. In hindsight I would look at it and probably feel pretty bad about it. But if I caught the guy, I would just shrug my shoulders and move on. It's something we deal with every day. I don't just go out on the streets thinking "Ok who's rights am I going to violate today." because if I did I wouldn't be able to do my job. It's not so black and white as we want to pretend it is; it's this huge broad band of gray ranging from nearly black to almost white. You have to make the decision that you feel is the best one to make given the time and what's at stake. The important thing to remember is most cops don't make these decisions weather or not they just violated someones rights, it's decided after. If there wasn't someone to regulate these instances and have honest to god discussions about them, then there would be no resolution or guidelines that we have to follow and it would be back in the good ol' days of shake-downs and unlawful arrests.

I actually find this more worrisome than anything else. To me, D.C. being the center of law in this country, they should be available at all times. If I'm expected to work long days or come in if there is a problem (I work at a theatre), it doesn't sit right to be like "nope, gotta spend another day in jail. I punched out."

The number one reason behind our current system is budget. Unlike most jurisdictions where people might have a state, local, or municipal agent of the government to determine weather or not someone makes bond or citation, our government has to pay a United States Attorney or Assistant to weigh these decisions. In an effort to save money, the government handed the responsibility to the Office of the Attorney General, who in turn handed the responsibility down to a DCMPD Official (Sergeant or above). Criteria for citation or bond is easily translated in to a program which has fill-in-the-blank parameters and fields that flag a detainee or defendant if they meet certain requirements (such as a crime of violence or been convicted of one in the past). Not sure how much money that saves but it's enough for minor things. There are steps we can take to get an emergency warrant or something but that requires waking someone up or getting an on-call person and be damn sure it's not bullshit. It's do-able but it's not completely a BS system (unless your 7 time convicted felon slips through the cracks due to a tired booking Sergeant). We don't even go to court for minor offenses and some felonies as long as it's not a crime of violence (i.e. domestic) or weapon-involved crime.

[hey]

it's pretty terrifying to see how cops think.

more fixed.

[shepardG]

I fucking despise you, and im ashamed to think i would still probably die to save you if we were ever in a life threatening situation.

[Eurell]

more fixed.

Neph writes a novel about how all he wants to do is save your life. Terrifying.


Hey says he would laugh at his slut sister for being raped. No problem here!

[Helm]

Threads have been pretty good lately.

[Restrat]

would you say the bill of the rights is more a bill of "good ideas sometime" then?