Man killed in police raid!!

HandyHamlet · Jun 21, 2011

Man, someone is more cranky that normal.

Why couldn't they have just called the guy?

And you most assuredly are jerking something. Knee or not.

1245A Defender · Jun 22, 2011

well,,,,

their was absolutely no reason to serve the warrant at his hideout of a house!
the confidential informant, that was really a hired and paid for, lying deceitful criminal,
had told the cops he would be in the bar every night!!!
Cops can just walk in and gently take him into custody.
no muss, no fuss, no fancy clothes.
and no risk to cops or old men.

JohnH · Jun 22, 2011

It is very much a question of how it was handled. Local sheriff said he could have picked up David Koresh in town with no fuss. The ATF wanted to show off thier stuff, how did that work out?

One can argue that they were defending themselvs, but who created the situation where the man felt the need to be shooting at invaders in the first place? A 69 year old man? How big a threat woudl he have been in town, and isn't it reasonable to have done a bit more basic police footwork adn put a case together, rather than go busting in with a warrant to search for pills? it really sounds like they didn't do their homework and were substituting brawn for brains, and a man died as a result.

And the cops will get off, and the judges will issue yet another ill concieved warrant to cover an ill concieved raid and someone else will die... to what end, the creation of a standing army caled police who can ignore our rights, freedom and lives at will?

LibertyDeath · Jun 22, 2011

Just because he is a 69 year old man with a cane does not mean he is harmless.

Who is to say that he wouldn't have shot at the police no matter where he was, potentially risking lives of uninvolved citizens.

HandyHamlet · Jun 22, 2011

Shoulda, coulda, woulda.

Doesn't change the fact that they killed him looking for pills.

M-Taliesin · Jun 22, 2011

HandyHamlet said:
Shoulda, coulda, woulda.

Doesn't change the fact that they killed him looking for pills.

Howdy Folks!
Show me somebody over 60 who doesn't have all manner of prescription drugs in their home that a doctor ordered up for pain, various maladies and sundry treatments. That'd be something of an rarity.

What compelling evidence existed to backup the hearsay testimony of an informant? That's where the rubber meets the road. If it was nothing more than hearsay, why... anybody can say anything about anybody they dislike and have the cops dispatch them. Things worked pretty much the same way during the Grand Inquisition. It only required somebody making a claim to get somebody tortured and put to death without a shred of evidence. I want to see what evidence existed for the original warrant. Assuming, of course, any exists.

Blessings,
M-Taliesin

eye95 · Jun 22, 2011

LibertyDeath said:
Just because he is a 69 year old man with a cane does not mean he is harmless.

Who is to say that he wouldn't have shot at the police no matter where he was, potentially risking lives of uninvolved citizens.

How dare you raise questions! Assumptions have been made and will not be questioned!

[/sarcasm]

sudden valley gunner · Jun 22, 2011

LibertyDeath said:
Just because he is a 69 year old man with a cane does not mean he is harmless.

Who is to say that he wouldn't have shot at the police no matter where he was, potentially risking lives of uninvolved citizens.

Anyone might shoot at police at anytime, I guess we just need to throw out the 4th amendment for "police" protection. (sarcasm)

We need to take back our human rights, one is to feel safe in our home on our private property. I don't give a rat's ass if the guy was selling pills or not. It did not and should not have meant his death. Oh and the argument that police were protecting themselves is ridiculous they broke into his home.

Here's a little history I gleaned recently, one reason the 4th amendment was written was to protect smuggling and the rights of people the Brits would violate by writing warrants to search peoples homes looking for contraband. So to say the gov. was justified in killing someone over the potential he might have contraband is ridiculous no matter how you look at it.

1000ydshooter · Jun 22, 2011

Update to this story. This was in todays edition.
http://www.dailypress.com/news/hampton/dp-nws-shooting-folo-20110621,0,5685652.story

Still dont see why a swat team was needed to do this. If you read the comments on both stories it seems a majority of reades feel the same way.. But i guess they felt the need to use swat bacause they were dealing with an old guy and we all know old folks are mean cause they are pissed about being old.

eye95 · Jun 22, 2011

Ya know, there was another similar thread about a former marine being killed in a raid. Then someone looked up the affidavit for the warrant and linked it. After reading the document, it has become clear that this former marine is currently a drug dealer.

Can anyone link the affidavit for the warrant in this case? Let's don't paint these folks as heroes or harmless until we have the facts.

Jack House · Jun 22, 2011

eye95 said:
Ya know, there was another similar thread about a former marine being killed in a raid. Then someone looked up the affidavit for the warrant and linked it. After reading the document, it has become clear that this former marine is currently a drug dealer.

Can anyone link the affidavit for the warrant in this case? Let's don't paint these folks as heroes or harmless until we have the facts.

I was wondering about that.

Normally, I would take the same stance, let's wait for more information. But in this particular case, I have to agree with the others. The police were at fault here. There was little need for a no-knock raid. They could have easily just taken him by surprise as he left his house to go to the bar. If they did not know he visited the bar everyday, they did not do their homework well enough to deserve a warrant.

paramedic70002 · Jun 22, 2011

I fear that this will be another controversial shooting the longer it drags out. Pretty hard to "prove" he was dealing his own drugs unless you've got marked bills from a transaction. Even IF he was guilty, he still has a right to defend his home.

Bad move by the LEOs on this warrant service. Could have been done better/differently. I doubt there was a pressing need to prevent him from destroying HIS OWN MEDS as evidence.

Did he have a criminal history? What's the CI's story? More facts need to come out.

And as for the bullet whizzing by the girl, it's hilarious that they say they didn't find a bullet so it didn't happen. More hilarious that the citizen thinks it's sloppy for the LEOs to not invite the suspect to a safe place for the shootout or even worse MISS.

eye95 · Jun 22, 2011

Jack House said:
I was wondering about that.

Normally, I would take the same stance, let's wait for more information. But in this particular case, I have to agree with the others. The police were at fault here. There was little need for a no-knock raid. They could have easily just taken him by surprise as he left his house to go to the bar. If they did not know he visited the bar everyday, they did not do their homework well enough to deserve a warrant.

None of the information we have says it was a no-knock raid. The police contend that they announced themselves. They could be lying, or they could have announced so close to knocking down the door that the man would not have had time to process the information that the folks breaking in had authority from a court to do so.

This is the kind of information we should patiently await before passing judgment. On the surface, I have to wonder if the action was justifiable. But, as with the other story, the characterization ("little old man with a cane") may be a willful distraction designed to take the focus of his being a criminal who shot police properly executing a lawful warrant.

I don't know. Again, can anyone post the affidavit? It is mentioned in the article, so it must be available to reporters, and likely also to the public.

Deanimator · Jun 22, 2011

Gunslinger said:
Allegedly for pills. Confidential informants are always around when the Gestapo kicks in a door and murders someone in their own home. Say he really did sell some percs. Is the penalty for that death in VA? More facts are needed, but one that is incontrovertable: the cops gunned down an old man in his own house.

Look at the Kathryn Johnston case. A "confidential informant" provided the information which the cops used to get the warrant for the raid on her home... too bad he never existed. Then after they murdered an old woman in her home (and planted drugs in her home), they tried to strongarm a REAL confidential informant into perjuring himself to protect the conspiracy. Unfortunately for the cops, rather than play ball, he dove out of a moving police car and ran to the FBI. The rest is history... and several cops with sweetheart plea deals. Still, none of them was too cavalier about dropping the soap in the shower...

Deanimator · Jun 22, 2011

paramedic70002 said:
What's the CI's story?

More importantly, does the CI even EXIST? The one in the Kathryn Johnston murder didn't.

Deanimator · Jun 22, 2011

eye95 said:
Ya know, there was another similar thread about a former marine being killed in a raid. Then someone looked up the affidavit for the warrant and linked it. After reading the document, it has become clear that this former marine is currently a drug dealer.

"Clear"?

If you look at the warrant affidavit for the Kathryn Johnston raid, it's "clear" that SHE was a "drug dealer". The funny thing is, the affidavit was a morass of perjury and she WASN'T a "drug dealer".

If we're going to determine guilt based on a warrant affidavit, why even have a trial? I mean, cops NEVER lie in warrant affidavits... except when they do.

Gunslinger · Jun 22, 2011

LibertyDeath said:
Just because he is a 69 year old man with a cane does not mean he is harmless.

Who is to say that he wouldn't have shot at the police no matter where he was, potentially risking lives of uninvolved citizens.

And who is to say he would? The point is, they had a search--NOT arrest, warrant against an older man, disabled with evidently no record or reason to suspect him of violence. They could have knocked on his door and waited a reasonable time for him to come down stairs--with his cane! and open the ******* door. But they didn't. They smashed in the door, guns drawn and ready to execute this man. And they did. He was murdered in his own home--accused of nothing, by SS thugs in their clown suits. And because he 'may' have sold some prescription drugs he obtained legally. "Confidential informant" is the recurring lie the Gestapo relied on and so do their progeny. Being denounced by a criminal, which the vast majority of 'informants' are, is a sentence of death, evidently, in VA. Too bad the old guy didn't have an M-4 loaded with M855s.

HandyHamlet · Jun 22, 2011

eye95 said:
None of the information we have says it was a no-knock raid.

Might want to reread the OP sparky. The Stormtrooper says they knocked on a no knock raid.

1000ydshooter said:
... dealing with an old guy and we all know old folks are mean cause they are pissed about being old.

Didn't someone declare they were "moving on"?

eye95 said:
Y After reading the document, it has become clear that this former marine is currently a drug dealer.

Good to know the legal process has been circumvented by an affidavit. We can establish guilt based on a piece of paper and immediately execute the guilty.

F*ck habeas corpus.

Gunslinger · Jun 22, 2011

1000ydshooter said:
Update to this story. This was in todays edition.
http://www.dailypress.com/news/hampton/dp-nws-shooting-folo-20110621,0,5685652.story

Still dont see why a swat team was needed to do this. If you read the comments on both stories it seems a majority of reades feel the same way.. But i guess they felt the need to use swat bacause they were dealing with an old guy and we all know old folks are mean cause they are pissed about being old.

The police declined to say whether the ONE bottle of pain killers--for a man with chronic pain, was prescribed to him. Gee, I wonder why. They found NOTHING indicative of any crime, but will now continue to lie, plant evidence and do their usual Gestapo routine to cover their ******* asses. I'm waiting for the CS 'chief' to say "it's for the children.." maybe the same ones that one badged thug almost killed. The guy had a gun collection. Too bad he reached for the wrong one.

Gunslinger · Jun 22, 2011

Deanimator said:
More importantly, does the CI even EXIST? The one in the Kathryn Johnston murder didn't.

You hit on a major factor. A sworn affidavit is required to obtain a search warrant in all states. VA uses magistrates, generally, to issue the warrant. CI's are not named. How do you prove it was a CI--unless as you point out above, some scumbag is strongarmed into lying. And how does the magistrate--who is rarely a lawyer and never a judge, place credibility on the sworn statement? Answer: he doesn't gas about credibility, just does what his cop buddies want. To hell with due process, innocence until proven guilty and any constitutional guarantee to be secure in your own home. Old guy murdered by cops? What else is new? I would give short odds that nothing is ever done with respect to what is probably a perjured affidavit. After all, our hero cops want to go home safely at the end of their shifts. Kill anyone you see and that's a good bet. But, the internal investigation will shur-nuff bring out the truth. One cop lies and the other swears to it, same as always.

Man killed in police raid!!

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member