1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Indiana Supreme Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by JollyRoger, May 13, 2011.

  1. GhostWriter16

    GhostWriter16 Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Messages:
    22,753
    Location:
    Wherever my name is posted
    NickyJ, RedRalph, and everyone in between on the Political Spectrum seem to agree that there is no way in the world that Indiana called it right...
     
  2. Dawgphood001

    Dawgphood001 The Professional Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    9,485
    Location:
    541 Oregon
    Uhh...sieg heil?

    /godwin
     
  3. illram

    illram Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,218
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Seen Kyle? He is about this tall. Anyone seen Kyle?
     
  4. BvBPL

    BvBPL Pour Decision Maker

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Messages:
    7,154
    Location:
    At the bar
    I don’t think that this ruling is legit, and, in fact, I’m worried that since the ruling appears to be based on the federal Constitution and not the state’s, I would worry that other jurisdictions could potentially cite this ruling as precedent. I particularly worry since this illegal entry appears to have been because of a relatively benign incident; a couple arguing outside. It seems to me that any escalation of violence was committed by the police.

    That said, please permit me to play devil’s advocate and present a hypothetical situation that makes my view questionable:

    Let’s say there’s Joe Cop, who’s a police officer. He doesn’t like violence, but will use appropriate force to prevent harm to himself or another. For him, being a police officer is just a job. He’s not trying to make any sort of statement in his line of work, but instead executes the law and his orders to the best of his ability because that’s his job. He’s just an average guy with a job.

    Joe Cop receives instructions to execute a search warrant at 23 Mockingbird Lane, the residence of Larry Lawbreaker, but there’s an issue with the Xerox machine used to make Joe’s copy of the warrant. The street number becomes smudged and reads 28 Mockingbird Lane, the residence of Jane Homeowner. Joe drives over to 28 Mockingbird, knocks on the door, and is met by Jane. Jane refuses Joe entry on the basis that no Larry lives at number 28, and she shuts the door in Joe’s face. Joe assumes that Jane is lying to him and breaks down the door, but Jane has since taken out and loaded her legally obtained handgun out of fear that an armed man is attempting to break into her house. This situation will likely end in serious harm to one or both parties.

    Are one’s civil liberties sufficiently valuable that they justify such a situation?
    --
    Regardless, the lesson of this case is that if the cops come to your door, always step outside your door to speak to them and close it behind you. If you leave the door open, as the guy in this case did, you open yourself to in plain sight allowances for search. Not that it worked for Henry Louis Gates, mind you.
     
  5. Warman17

    Warman17 NES Grandpa

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2002
    Messages:
    7,107
    Location:
    America
    I do not understand how a court can rule in a way which completely disregards the 4th amendment.

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
     
  6. civver_764

    civver_764 Deity

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,436
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Wait what.

    What.

    I don't even get it.

    What possible legal argument could there be for this.

    In my home state nonetheless. I'm so proud of you Indiana.
     
  7. illram

    illram Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,218
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Clearly, it is not unreasonable for an officer to unreasonably break into your house. :crazyeye:
     
  8. timtofly

    timtofly One Day

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2009
    Messages:
    9,429
    Can a cop from MI come down and "crash" a party?
     
  9. Atticus

    Atticus Deity Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Messages:
    3,666
    Location:
    Helsinki, Finland
    If you've done nothing illegal, you got no reason to fear of police breaking into your house for no reason.


    I'm just gonna take this role here, because nobody else haven't yet.
     
  10. galdre

    galdre Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,859
    I almost missed the fine print :lol:
     
  11. GhostWriter16

    GhostWriter16 Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Messages:
    22,753
    Location:
    Wherever my name is posted
    Well, I live in New York, so I know how you feel (Note, my state isn't just liberal, they also have some of the dumbest laws on the planet.)

    But, what legal argument? When's the last time that's mattered? Its "Constitutional" because we say so. No questions asked:p
     
  12. civver_764

    civver_764 Deity

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,436
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    This is not a liberal measure at all. I don't care what definition of the term you're using.
     
  13. GhostWriter16

    GhostWriter16 Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Messages:
    22,753
    Location:
    Wherever my name is posted
    I was talking about New York when I said liberal, not Indiana.

    What was passed in Indiana was a statist measure, whatever definition you use, not conservative or liberal.

    Though, if you use liberal in the usage sometimes used by Americans to mean "Big government anti-American" than by that definition, liberal applies:)
     
  14. Skwink

    Skwink FRIIIIIIIIIITZ

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Messages:
    5,647
    Do I also have permission to come into a cop's home at will too?
     
  15. Rashiminos

    Rashiminos Fool Prophet

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    6,563
    Location:
    The Border.
    Red, white, and fascism.
     
  16. Berzerker

    Berzerker Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    17,342
    Location:
    the golf course
    No right of self defense against government agents acting outside of the law? Gotta do some more reading, but at first glance it looks like the court went well beyond the actual case - cops dont need a warrant to investigate a domestic abuse call and I dont think the occupant can tell them to stick it when they show up to investigate. How did the court use that to tear down the castle walls for resisting unlawful/illegal searches.
     
  17. Formaldehyde

    Formaldehyde Both Fair And Balanced

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    33,999
    Location:
    USA #1
    A decade ago, my response would have been that the Supremes would eventually hear the case and again remind the more backward states they had no right to violate the Constitution. But who knows nowadays?
     
  18. GhostWriter16

    GhostWriter16 Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Messages:
    22,753
    Location:
    Wherever my name is posted
    I wouldn't consider it "Backward." This wasn't happening in the past. Its happening now because government likes power.
     

Share This Page