-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Henrico's at it again ...
- Thread starter SAvage410
- Start date
Her address was on the search warrant so the cops obviously needed to break in and restrain her for their own safety while they [strike]waterboarded[/strike] interrogated her. And if the cops knew about her granddaughter is is proof that the granddaughter is/was/will be up to no good.
Nothing to see here, citizens. Move along.
*
stay safe.
* - not sure if that ought to be noted as sarcasm or not. You decide.
Nothing to see here, citizens. Move along.
*
stay safe.
* - not sure if that ought to be noted as sarcasm or not. You decide.
Must be some mistake. Couldn't be in Henrico, that's the West End. Sure to be safe in your bed there.
Guess you forgot that Henrico wraps around Richmond to give us both a West End and an East End. And Crenshaw Avenue is known far and wide throughout the area as an oasis of law-abidingness.
stay safe.
va_tazdad
Regular Member
The article says
STATE POLICE, not Henrico. Seems this time HCPD was not at fault this time.
(Prob because they were not invited)
STATE POLICE, not Henrico. Seems this time HCPD was not at fault this time.
(Prob because they were not invited)
davidmcbeth
Banned
Have an extra front and rear doors in your basement for just these type of situations.
Everybody blames the cops but a judge signed that warrant. Maybe he should get a new job.
Who was the judge? I don't know who the judge is...
Maybe a situation like Kathryn Johnston?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/02/24/atlanta.police/
Where cops just put whatever they want on warrant applications to get one issued...clearly something was wrong with the application.
We need to eliminate full immunity for judges IMO ... they have little accountability until time for elections, sans federal judges who have no accountability whatsoever.
Everybody blames the cops but a judge signed that warrant. Maybe he should get a new job.
Who was the judge? I don't know who the judge is...
Maybe a situation like Kathryn Johnston?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/02/24/atlanta.police/
Where cops just put whatever they want on warrant applications to get one issued...clearly something was wrong with the application.
We need to eliminate full immunity for judges IMO ... they have little accountability until time for elections, sans federal judges who have no accountability whatsoever.
Real honest to God Judges rarely sign search warrants here David. Magistrates, who are the lowest link on the chain, generally don't have law degrees and really aren't required to have a high school diploma, are who normally issues them.
davidmcbeth
Banned
Your mission then, if you choose to accept it, is to find out who signed for the search warrant.
Who cares! There are only a couple of Magistrates in Henrico, all idiots and all immune.
wrearick
Regular Member
From the description of the "execution" of the warrant- this was a "no-knock" style/type of warrant. Is anyone familiar with any special requirements (IN VIRGINIA) for this type of warrant? It seems extreme to break down the door of a 75 year old grandmother without some sort of justification. She could have suffered a heart attack from the shock.
TFred
Regular Member
"No-knock" entry is one of my pet-peeves. Now that CHP privacy is no longer an issue, it might even be my top peeve. I believe User posted on the subject a while back, but I didn't save a link. This should be a top priority to correct in the General Assembly, by specifically defining real guidelines that allow for use ONLY in the case of emergent threats to innocent life, and holding local law enforcement and magistrates personally accountable for proper use.
Here's the bottom line:
The legal use of no-knock entry by law-enforcement and Castle Doctrine cannot co-exist in any jurisdiction. It is that simple.
TFred
davidmcbeth
Banned
I look at it like I do for the death penalty. It looks good on paper but the gov't just cannot use proper discipline and cannot be trusted not to kill the innocent. I am not in favor of the death penalty. Nor no-knocks.
The last I read was that Virginia does not have Castle Doctrine. Some previous Assemblies had a couple folks try to push it through, but others didn't want to bother and said it is already implied in the state of VA. That's complete BS because we all no that "implied" doesn't hold water in a court of law.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Wolf_shadow
Activist Member
As I recall from User's post our Castle Doctrine comes from common law and provides more protection than any of the bills introduced. There is a post on it from him here somewhere.
Virginia enjoys extremely strong Castle Doctrine through common law/case law. The negative side is that circumstances may well require spending large sums of time and money via the courts to make full use of it - the pieces parts are spread out all over the legal landscape. There is no easy qualified immunity.
There was a concerted effort to consolidate everything into one neat package recently in the General Assembly. Unfortunately, the bill(s) got extremely cumbersome and created more problems than they fixed. The effort was killed by the initial proponents. Dan Hawes expounded on this at great length - a sample of his thoughts appear on the following thread, beginning with posts #38 & # 40. Dan even mentions "no knock" warrants.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...OOK-AT-THE-CASTLE-DOCTRINE-FOR-VIRGINIA/page2
I would very much like to see "curtilage" removed/replaced to include all property owned or controlled + add one's vehicle to Castle Doctrine. Note too that Stand Your Ground is closely allied with this issue.
TFred
Regular Member
And in what contributes to the "parts are spread out all over the legal landscape," I have been assured by a very "gun-friendly" member of the House of Delegates that Virginia's being a strong Contributory Negligence state makes it very difficult (nothing is impossible in the legal system) to be found civilly liable in a clean use of self-defense. I don't have any statistics to confirm or deny that claim, but for what it's worth, that may be a significant reason that civil immunity is not a high priority.
TFred
Last edited:
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
I just want to reiterate that the combination of the fourth amendment + prohibition renders this sort of thing inevitable. They cannot co-exist.
Y'all know which my preference is for.
Y'all know which my preference is for.
SAvage410
Regular Member
I just finished reading "Last Call: The Rise and Fall of Prohibition" by Daniel Okrent. It's an excellent read, and illustrates just how little we've learned from our own sorry history. While it is prohibition-specific, I find that its lessons apply equally well to the War on (Some) Drugs, no-knock warrants, police militarization, official corruption and the like.
Highly recommended for insight into our current dilemma.
Highly recommended for insight into our current dilemma.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Those who do lean from history are doomed to watch the rest repeat it.
stay safe.
Rusty Young Man
Regular Member
Last edited: