Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 113

Thread: Las Vegas, NV police violate 3rd 4th & 14th amendments

  1. #1
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426

    Las Vegas, NV police violate 3rd 4th & 14th amendments

    .

  2. #2
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    This. Is. Insane.

    Police force their way in to _2_ houses (happening to belong to a couple & their son), remove & arrest the occupants (for obstruction), all to have a base of operations for a DV situation at a nearby house.

    The occupants repeatedly told police they did not want to participate and did not consent to officers being there.
    I look forward to hearing that these poor people have won a large civil rights suit.

    The Mitchells seek punitive damages for violations of the third, fourth and 14th Amendments, assault and battery, conspiracy, defamation, abuse of process, malicious prosecution, negligence and emotional distress.
    the cabinets and closet doors throughout the house had been left open and their contents moved about. Water had been consumed from their water dispenser. Even the refrigerator door had been left ajar and mustard and mayonnaise had been left on their kitchen floor.
    http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/07/03/59061.htm

  3. #3
    Regular Member papa bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    mayberry, nc
    Posts
    2,258
    they really pulled somebody out of their house to watch another one???
    I think this would have violated the third amendment too
    Luke 22:36 ; 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

    "guns are like a Parachute, if you don't have one when you need it, you will not need one again"
    - unknown

    i you call a CHP a CCW then you are really stupid. period.

  4. #4
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613
    The Mitchells seek punitive damages for violations of the third, fourth and 14th Amendments, assault and battery, conspiracy, defamation, abuse of process, malicious prosecution, negligence and emotional distress.
    Quote Originally Posted by papa bear View Post
    they really pulled somebody out of their house to watch another one???
    I think this would have violated the third amendment too
    Was included in the title, the OP and the linked article .

    You just missed it
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 07-04-2013 at 12:21 AM.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  5. #5
    Regular Member DCKilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Wet Side, WA
    Posts
    527
    This must be one the most disgusting reports I have ever read. Besides murdering one of the residents or killing the family pet, it can't get any worse.
    Last edited by DCKilla; 07-04-2013 at 03:49 AM.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Henderson police arrested a family for refusing to let officers use their homes as lookouts for a domestic violence investigation of their neighbors, the family claims in court.
    That ^ is the lead sentence. All the rest is merely the filling in of details. A very good job of doing that.

    So the Henderson police believe that "all your house belong to us"? I'll bet the Chief has a pretty nice one - wonder how he'll feel tonight when the town stops by to watch the fireworks and eat snacks1. What? You say he thinks watching fireworks on TV is not as important as watching a house where some DV incident is taking place? How droll.

    Let's not forget to pepper spray the Chief's dog and let it stay outside all night - exposure to coyotes is almost as bad as exposure to 100*+ heat with no water or shade, right?

    The frosting on the cake is that the police did this not once, but twice. First by breaking in the door of Anthony Mitchell's home. Then by (unsuccessfully) coercing and intimidating his father out of the house, and later by bulling their way past his mother while she was telling them to "come back with a warrant".

    While a few heads ought to be mounted on poles in front of the Police Department headquarters, I suggest encapsulating them in clear resin after a week or so - make sure the message does not fade away. (Yes, it does deprive some vultures of a meal or two. They will get by.)

    stay safe.

    1 - for those that may have forgotten, the colonists were a bit miffed at not only being forced to have the King's soldiers sleeping under their roof but being forced to feed them and not getting reimbursed.

    Contrast that with pre-D Day England when US troops were being put up in private homes while the big military camps were being built. Rent and a food allowance was paid. Some patriotic Brits wanted to refuse the payments but were actually forced to accept them, along with an explanation that the US Army was not going to do to them what the British Army had done some 150 years previously.

    US Army occupation forces in Europe were often quartered in civillian homes. Some Germans were conflicted between being seen as "collaborating" and greatly improving their situation by accepting the rent & board payments. (Not to mention having an inside source for American cigarettes and mess hall food.)
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Was included in the title, the OP and the linked article .

    You just missed it
    If you are correcting the title, I recommend also changing the name of the police department. This is Henderson, a suburb of Las Vegas.

    On topic: What possible justification can the police have cited for not taking the clear "no" from the victim?? Did they have a warrant (which should not be issued)? Is there a NV law that permits such a seizure without warrant (which would be unconstitutional)?

    Or did they do it just because they have the equipment, manpower, and chutzpah to do so?

    I want to hear the Henderson PD try to justify this felonious home invasion.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    ....

    I want to hear the Henderson PD try to justify this felonious home invasion.
    Can I get a senior citizen discount on the price of a ticket to that event?

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  9. #9
    Regular Member FreeInAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Secret Bunker
    Posts
    2,573

    Re: Las Vegas, NV police violate 3rd 4th & 14th amendments

    Hederson/ NV. Police seem to suffer from a severe case of rectal cranial inversion. I will do my best to avoid that city until they get their heads out of their @$$ess.
    Last edited by FreeInAZ; 07-04-2013 at 07:11 AM.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" by Mahatma Gandhi

    “Your beliefs become your thoughts. Your thoughts become your words. Your words become your actions. Your actions become your habits. Your habits become your values. Your values become your destiny.” by Mahatma Gandhi

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Can I get a senior citizen discount on the price of a ticket to that event?

    stay safe.
    Based on what they would have to say, they should pay us for having to listen to it.

    Seriously, I cannot fathom the justification they could possibly have!

    Folks here know (and some revile me for it) that I do not blindly assume that all adverse police actions are unwarranted and are rights violations, that I really try to understand both sides of the issue before making a judgment. However, what other side could the police possibly have. Is there some law in NV that allows them to commandeer a home?!?

    If there is, IMO, it would be unconstitutional. If the courts did not see it that way, the People should be horrified by the possibility that the make it unconstitutional (or, at least, illegal).

    I suspect that the justification is that the police in this case saw themselves as the good guys, and anyone who doesn't willingly go along with them must be part of the bad guys. But that is not how our system is supposed to work. The police must have probable cause and (absent exigent circumstances) a piece of paper with a judge's validation of the probable cause to believe that someone is a bad guy before taking the kind of action that they did.

    Please, Henderson PD, try to explain this one. I really want to hear it.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    634

    C'mon Eye, justify?

    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    If you are correcting the title, I recommend also changing the name of the police department. This is Henderson, a suburb of Las Vegas.

    On topic: What possible justification can the police have cited for not taking the clear "no" from the victim?? Did they have a warrant (which should not be issued)? Is there a NV law that permits such a seizure without warrant (which would be unconstitutional)?

    Or did they do it just because they have the equipment, manpower, and chutzpah to do so?

    I want to hear the Henderson PD try to justify this felonious home invasion.
    "Officer safety ,man, Officer safety, yeah dude, Officer safety!!!" Can't you just hear it? Doesn't it make you want to puke? What does it make the rest of you want to do? I'll never tell. This cannot, must not go unpunished.

    sidestreet

    Jeremiah 29 vs. 11-13

    we are not equal, we will never be equal, but we must be relentless.

  12. #12
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,276
    Quote Originally Posted by sidestreet View Post
    "Officer safety ,man, Officer safety, yeah dude, Officer safety!!!" Can't you just hear it? Doesn't it make you want to puke? What does it make the rest of you want to do? I'll never tell. This cannot, must not go unpunished.

    sidestreet

    Jeremiah 29 vs. 11-13

    we are not equal, we will never be equal, but we must be relentless.
    And they will be punished, in the form of a settlement. It really is a punishment for the tax payer, locally and nationwide. Almost every police dept nationwide is receiving massive amounts of federal money in equipment, vehicles, and outright paying the salaries of officers. They are not to concerned with the lawsuits leveled at their local government. Cut the federal payola, and their attitude would change.

    Solving many of our problems from top to bottom could be accomplished by reducing the amount of money that the federal government can have created, and the amount they spend. Every single atrocity that happens to us is because of monopoly money.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  13. #13
    Regular Member Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,086
    Let me say it one more time:

    The only EFFECTIVE reaction to police acting like an hostile army of occupation is to TREAT them like one.


    1. Refuse to acknowledge their presence or talk to them in ANY way not mandated by LAW.
    2. Refuse to sell them ANYTHING or provide them with ANY good or service, be it a hamburger or an automobile.
    3. Refuse to believe ANYTHING they say without detailed documented proof.
    4. Refuse to vote for ANY levy or tax intended to fund them, much less increase their funding.
    5. Refuse to vote for ANY politician who does not support this campaign.


    You may not be able to stop others from oppressing you. You have NO duty to assist them.
    --- Gun control: The theory that 110lb. women have the "right" to fistfight with 210lb. rapists.

  14. #14
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    Let me say it one more time:

    The only EFFECTIVE reaction to police acting like an hostile army of occupation is to TREAT them like one.


    1. Refuse to acknowledge their presence or talk to them in ANY way not mandated by LAW.
    2. Refuse to sell them ANYTHING or provide them with ANY good or service, be it a hamburger or an automobile.
    3. Refuse to believe ANYTHING they say without detailed documented proof.
    4. Refuse to vote for ANY levy or tax intended to fund them, much less increase their funding.
    5. Refuse to vote for ANY politician who does not support this campaign.


    You may not be able to stop others from oppressing you. You have NO duty to assist them.
    +1 And do exactly what you did here, tell others to do the same.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  15. #15
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    If a violation of the 3A is held then a court will formally classify a LEA as soldiers aka the military.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154

    Ilya Somin on 'A Real Live Third Amendment Case'

    1. The most obvious obstacle to winning a Third Amendment claim here is that police arguably do not qualify as “soldiers.”
    2. [The Third ]Amendment is one of the few parts of the Bill of Rights that the Supreme Court still has not “incorporated” against state governments.
    3. One interesting additional issue that may be raised by this case is the question of how long “soldiers” have to occupy a home before the incident qualifies as the kind of “quartering” forbidden by the Third Amendment.

    The full text of the Mitchells’ complaint is available here. http://www.scribd.com/doc/151769636/...t-al-Complaint

    http://www.volokh.com/2013/07/04/a-r...mendment-case/
    Last edited by Nightmare; 07-05-2013 at 08:58 AM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    If a violation of the 3A is held then a court will formally classify a LEA as soldiers aka the military.
    Engaging Posse Comitatus Act?

    18USC1385 "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. "

    Why bother since USCG became the military arm of Incompetano's DHS? The PCA applies only to the United States Army and the United States Air Force.

    I worked under one of the authorized exceptions to the PCA, 18 USC § 831, as facility coordinator for the now defunct Joint Army Navy Nuclear Accident Capability
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  18. #18
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Engaging Posse Comitatus Act?

    18USC1385 "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. "

    Why bother since USCG became the military arm of Incompetano's DHS? The PCA applies only to the United States Army and the United States Air Force.

    I worked under one of the authorized exceptions to the PCA, 18 USC § 831, as facility coordinator for the now defunct Joint Army Navy Nuclear Accident Capability
    Posse Comitatus Act is not relevant to this thread. Henderson PD is not the Army or Air Force.....obviously.

    Claiming a violation of their 3A is the point of my post.

    Amendment 3 - Quartering of Soldiers. Ratified 12/15/1791. No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
    Will the cops claim that the cops are in a time of war or that the 3A does not apply to cops. I suspect the 3A violation claim will be dismissed. Any lawyer that would include a 3A violation claim or permit it to be included in the suit needs to reread the 3A.

  19. #19
    Regular Member papa bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    mayberry, nc
    Posts
    2,258
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    That ^
    1 - for those that may have forgotten, the colonists were a bit miffed at not only being forced to have the King's soldiers sleeping under their roof but being forced to feed them and not getting reimbursed.

    Contrast that with pre-D Day England when US troops were being put up in private homes while the big military camps were being built. Rent and a food allowance was paid. Some patriotic Brits wanted to refuse the payments but were actually forced to accept them, along with an explanation that the US Army was not going to do to them what the British Army had done some 150 years previously.

    US Army occupation forces in Europe were often quartered in civillian homes. Some Germans were conflicted between being seen as "collaborating" and greatly improving their situation by accepting the rent & board payments. (Not to mention having an inside source for American cigarettes and mess hall food.)
    SKID you forgot to include that this was taking before the supreme court, and they ruled since it wasn't on US soil. then it was OK to do
    Luke 22:36 ; 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

    "guns are like a Parachute, if you don't have one when you need it, you will not need one again"
    - unknown

    i you call a CHP a CCW then you are really stupid. period.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    an acutal 3rd amendment case - ya know the 3rd is not incorporated

    http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/0...mendment-case/

    Ilyah Somin, at The Volokh Conspiracy, highlights one of those stories which normally wouldn’t qualify as anything above “local news” were it not for the interesting constitutional questions involved. The family of Anthony Mitchell, in Henderson, Nevada, just outside of Vegas, have filed a claim which states that the police have violated their third amendment rights.


    This may have to go "all the way" ..

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    1. The most obvious obstacle to winning a Third Amendment claim here is that police arguably do not qualify as “soldiers.”
    2. [The Third ]Amendment is one of the few parts of the Bill of Rights that the Supreme Court still has not “incorporated” against state governments.
    3. One interesting additional issue that may be raised by this case is the question of how long “soldiers” have to occupy a home before the incident qualifies as the kind of “quartering” forbidden by the Third Amendment.

    The full text of the Mitchells’ complaint is available here. http://www.scribd.com/doc/151769636/...t-al-Complaint

    http://www.volokh.com/2013/07/04/a-r...mendment-case/
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  22. #22
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    "Incorporation" is a load of horse huey, we are born with rights.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  23. #23
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by papa bear View Post
    SKID you forgot to include that this was taking before the supreme court, and they ruled since it wasn't on US soil. then it was OK to do
    The misguided belief the constitution somehow grants the government from only respecting the rights of united States citizens.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  24. #24
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Actually, it appears the 3rd amendment might apply to the states, the 2nd circuit ruled in the early 1980s in Engblom v. Carey that the third amendment applied to the states and that national guard soldiers activated to perform civilian functions qualified as soldiers for the 3rd amendment.

    That case involved striking corrections officers at a New York prison, they officers lived in employer provided housing and went on strike, so the corrections department kicked the strikers out and moved national guardsmen into their housing while the NYARNG performed the corrections officers duties.

    The case ended up bringing no relief for the Officers since the court also ruled that Hugh Carey was the governor he was entitled to QI but they did incorporate the 3rd in the 2nd circuit and made a loose definition of "soldier"
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    "Incorporation" is a load of horse huey, we are born with rights.
    Keep in mind that the "Bill of Rights" was meant as a restraint against the federal government. As you know it didn't grant rights, but it was intended to protect them from the fed. In the case of the Third amendment, it doesn't make sense to incorporate it to the states because soldiers are commanded by the Commander-in-Chief and he's already bound by the Third.

    In addition, every state should have something similar to the Third in their constitutions.

    Here's the one for my state of La.

    §6. Freedom from Intrusion

    Section 6. No person shall be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner or lawful occupant.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •