VincentHill
Needs a life
Posts: 6520
|
posted January 05, 2006 10:42 AM
 Edited By: VincentHill on 5 Jan 2006 10:45
OT Government Sponsored Terrorist?
Last Friday in Toledo Ohio early in the Morning a Group of about 10 heavly armed men started beating on the door of a School Teacher in her 50's who is on Vacation because of the Holidays. She wakes up out of a Sound Sleep and looks out of her Bedroom WIndow to see this> She got up grabbed a Robe and went to the front door. When she leaned down to pick up the mail on the floor in front of the door, one of them yelled, "Do not touch anything"! She opened the door and asked what was wrong. With All Guns drawn they wanted a person by the Name of -------- ----------. The Teacher replies that she never heard of this person. They then ask her who is at home and she stated No one. They then ask who lives Up-Stairs and she stated her Daughter who is not at home but at work. They then brush past her and go up the steps and search her daughter's apartment, come down stairs and search her house. SHe asked several times who where they and did they have a Warrant or anything. WHen finished, they left and went down the street.
The Teacher called a friend of hers that was a Policeman and he asked if there was a "Uniformed Officer" with them? "No" she answered. He told her to go down the street and ask again "Who they were and for Identification". She did this and when she went to the leader, he stated, "We appreciate having Citizens Like you to help make our job easier" She asked again and told the person "What choice did I have with all of your guns drawn"? Finally he pulled his ID. The FBI!.
I guess this is an example of the "PATRIOT ACT"!!! Just think, in this country, your home can be taken because someone with more money wants it under "Immient Domain". They can break into your home with out a Warrent. And last, they can listen to your personal Phone calls without any court order even when they could get one after the Fact!
BTW, The School Teacher in Toledo?? She is my Cousin that took care of My Mon for many years before she died.
____________
Made History @ Daytona and still one fast old man!!
  
|
rac4it
Needs a job
Bergie
Posts: 3009
|
posted January 05, 2006 11:16 AM
Welcome to 30 years ago, Vincent.
The FBI, and the BATF, have been doing this for 30+ years! The ATF is worse! If she had owned a dog, especially a larger breed dog like a German Shepard, undoubtedly they would have killed the dog first and asked questions later. ATF has done this to many people on many occasions! STORMTROOPERS!
There is nothing you can do about it either. Big Brother is the man and he can not be stopped. They are above the law.
|
Ninjaman12R
Needs a job
as a Deal's Gap tour guide.
Posts: 4767
|
posted January 05, 2006 11:39 AM
quote:
Welcome to 30 years ago, Vincent.
The FBI, and the BATF, have been doing this for 30+ years! The ATF is worse! If she had owned a dog, especially a larger breed dog like a German Shepard, undoubtedly they would have killed the dog first and asked questions later. ATF has done this to many people on many occasions! STORMTROOPERS!
There is nothing you can do about it either. Big Brother is the man and he can not be stopped. They are above the law.
QFT Bergie, and it's only going to get worse. 
Vincent I am sorry that your cousin had to go through this, but it is for certain that instances like this are going to become more common.
____________
What we're dealin' with here is a complete lack of respect for the law.
Sheriff Buford T. Justice of TEXAS
|
VincentHill
Needs a life
Posts: 6520
|
posted January 05, 2006 12:06 PM
Bergie, Ninja Man, As she was telling me this, I almost could not breathe! I kept waiting for the "Punch Line" or April Fool or she had a Nightmare. I know how I am when I am Startled awake and it takes a few seconds to get your senses but THIS?? SHe even lives in a "Good" Neighborhood called the Old West End between the Cathederal and the Cathloic High School (Central High) across from Fulton Elementary School and 2 blocks from Scott High School where my dad taught.
I could have handled it better if after they did everything they "THEN" said who they where and said we were given wrong information, but they just left with no FU Screw You Go to Hell or anything. She was even afraid to call the Police where she has friends!
I just hope if it even happens to me that I am awake enough not to pull out Mr. Mossberg and think I am under Seige. WOW Guys, Land of the Free? Home of the Brave? (10 guns pointed at 1 older woman in a night gown with the house surrounded? The thing that scares me is if her Daughter had been there. She has Severe Asthma and now we understand looks something lik the person they were looking for. They break in her bedroom, it could have killed her if they had not of. I am too old for this!
____________
Made History @ Daytona and still one fast old man!!
|
slug
Pro
Out in search of my mind...
Posts: 1433
|
posted January 05, 2006 12:44 PM
hrmm,no warrant, i would be screaming bloody murder to congressman, senators, judges, friends of cops etc to make SURE these buttpirates were at least embarassed enough to think a bit more before storming a house.
i too hope that i would wake up enough to not take a "friend" tot he door. likely they would kill me first then claim i tried to shoot them.
or my 14 year old son my dog, and my wife holding my baby... oh, wait, this already happened....
   
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 05, 2006 01:26 PM
Edited By: trenace on 5 Jan 2006 13:28
Remember Elian Gonzalez being forcibly removed from his family by jackbooted thugs, at the point of automatic weapons, under the Clinton Administration?
Remember Waco? Under Clinton? (BTW, still tell me what crimes they committed or there was strong evidence of their committing that merited the initial BATF armed first-to-fire assault...)
Tell me it has gotten worse in these regards since Clinton? Haven't seen sieges like what he pulled.
|
VincentHill
Needs a life
Posts: 6520
|
posted January 05, 2006 02:53 PM
More Janet Reno (To me) than Clinton (Maybe he wanted a Woman he could be sure he never wanted  Worse than Her was Joan Claybrook who put 85 MPH Speedometers in Porsches Go in the Turn at who knows speed.
The Deal is, It should not happen that way in "America"!!
They should show a Badge or have a Uniform Police with them! Supposed a group of Thugs got the idea and did this How would you know the difference?? (I mean this)
____________
Made History @ Daytona and still one fast old man!!
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 05, 2006 03:07 PM
Edited By: trenace on 5 Jan 2006 15:08
Well, in general I totally agree with you but as to the specific case, I don't know enough.
I have a suspicion that if, for example, this is a guy that had he not been caught -- let's say this was a fairly hot pursuit with the FBI having a pretty good lead narrowed down to a pretty small location where the guy was -- then shortly after the consequence would have been a lot of people DEAD, then once all those people were dead then the complaining would be that the FBI had the info and just let him go on his mass-murder spree.
Ultimately, the lady was scared by men holding guns and searching her house trying to find someone having nothing to do with her, not trying to pin anything on her but trying to find some fugitive, is that correctly the summary?
There may be times when that's needed.
I don't think that compares to the Clinton Adminstration's use of federal law enforcement as paramilitary assault teams.
|
VincentHill
Needs a life
Posts: 6520
|
posted January 05, 2006 03:57 PM
Trenace, the Problem is there is was no law that allowed people to just walk into you house and take over except the Law of the jungle which is what we have. I hope you do not get the opportunity to experience this "Personally" where they walk in and do what they want to and leave and never tell or show you anything. A bad joke is the difference between Rape and Sex in Salesmanship. NONE was used here even after the fact. Too much power to too few people and they take away any rights you have. also they were looking for a young Woman in her 20's. This is not a Clinton or Bush thing but an American thing. This is not how Americans are supposed to be treated No matter who they are or where they live!
____________
Made History @ Daytona and still one fast old man!!
|
slug
Pro
Out in search of my mind...
Posts: 1433
|
posted January 05, 2006 04:13 PM
+10000000
like i said i would be calling every group i could find andmake as big a stink as i could about it.
as much as i hate to evenmention this idiotic group, they ARE big enough to make noise if they ahven't been paid off: ACLU.
granted they are tha anti just about everything american union, but they might be able to make enough noise to get on the radar.
the least she should get is a real apology from the perpetrators. In reality whoever decided that they could just march in ought to be fired. they ahve NO NO NO NO NO NO NO business being armed and sent out to do things.
|
TedG
Moderator
Posts: 8222
|
posted January 05, 2006 05:32 PM
Sounds like something the KGB would pull or maybe the Gestapo in WWII. Ah welcome to Bush's new USSR.
____________
Ted
2000 Green ZX12 sold
The fast color!!
Green 2005 ZX10R
2009 Concours Black ABS
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 05, 2006 06:04 PM
Edited By: trenace on 5 Jan 2006 18:12
For sure not all of this story has been presented.
It seems extraordinarily unlikely that these FBI agents just decided randomly, on account of being bored, to show up somewhere and search a house.
Who believes that?
No, there's got to be more to it... and without that info it is very hard or impossible to really to judge this.
Another factor is the local laws.
There are jurisdictions where the standard for giving police legal permission to enter your house is simply opening the door to them without maintaining a chain link lock and/or opening more than such-and-such distance, etc.
There are also "hot pursuit" laws that can make entry into homes legal without a warrant. That's been true for a long time and has nothing to do with the "Patriot Act" or "government terrorism" or anything else.
Until you know the law there, you don't know that this may not have been 100% legal.
Get all the facts on this story and then we can judge... the "one-side" version and lacking the info on the local laws on that point, one cannot.
Also I don't know how anyone can say the FBI has no business being armeded and sent out to do things. That's nuts... as is the idea that this proves the United States has turned into the USSR or pinning the blame on a particular politician that an individual hates, who had nothing to do with the particular act. What that is, is a blame game and axe grinding, not rational analysis or discussion.
|
slug
Pro
Out in search of my mind...
Posts: 1433
|
posted January 05, 2006 07:12 PM
you ignored the point of my comment above....
The FBI has no business whatsoever to violate the Constitution of the United States of America.
In this case i don't care WHAT local 'laws' exist, they are trumped by the Constitution of the United States of America.
Their warrantless search of her home is a violation of the Constitution of the United States of America.
As such, the person making the decision to do so violated their oath as agents of the Government of the United States of America to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. Ergo, they ahve NO right or place to be allowed that kind of decision making. If you cannot trust an official at their word that they will follow their oath of office, they need to be removed from that office.
I am sure there is more to it. But if the basics of the story are true (and honestly haven't seen any evidence that Vincent is a liar ever), that no warrant was produced or issued or provided when requested, and they indeed forcibly entered her home, they violated the Constritution of the United States of America.
We aren't talking about blame game or axe grinding, we are talking about a rational discussion concerning acts that are plainly and blatantly contrary to the Law of the Land that we call the Constitution of the United States of America.
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 05, 2006 08:05 PM
Edited By: trenace on 5 Jan 2006 20:40
Can you cite the part of the Constitution that prevents police from entering a house when the door's been opened, no refusal to entry is given, when in hot pursuit of a felon?
If you claim that the clause regarding search and seizure prevents this not so. It has nothing to do with making hot pursuit of a felon end simply by their entering another person's home (and maybe threatening them, if anyone's home, that they must deny that the criminal is there) and then the cops supposedly have to go get a warrant before proceeding further. Not so.
I would bet that everyone now objecting would be singing a different tune if the aftermath had been (thank God it was not) that she opened the door, didn't admit a criminal had entered (because the fugitive had a gun on her from another room or was threatening to kill a family member or whatever if she invited them in or said the criminal was there) and then when the FBI left due to no warrant despite being legal, let's say, in that jurisdiction to enter the home in that circumstance, she was killed. Oh, then it would be negligent FBI. Thank God that wasn't the case, but just think about it.
Your concept of the Constitution making illegal entering homes to apprehend felons in hot pursuit is wrong. That is not what the search and seizure clause is about. It's about the government unreasonably searching without warrant a person's property or effects for the purpose of obtaining prosecution evidence, not with regard to arresting persons.
Nope, when you're a felon and the police are in the process of hot pursuit, don't assume that all you need to do is go into someone's house and then the police can't come in, coz you're wrong, that is NOT the law (including not the Constitution.)
As for the issue of their having their guns out, again, it seems unlikely that all this was a random act out of boredom or whatever. Not knowing why it occurred, you don't know it wasn't on account of a suspect known to be armed and dangerous in that area. You demand that law enforcement cannot have their guns ready in such a situation?
I'm a libertarian myself but you can't tie the hands of law enforcement that severely, that they can't have their guns out in such cases, and they can't enter a home in pursuit where they have information an armed and dangerous felon has gone to ground in that immediate area (with no information having been given on the cause, that's as good a guess as any) when the owner opens the door and gives no objection to entry. How bad do you want to hamstring law enforcement? Sounds like about 100%!!
Basically, before playing Constitutional lawyer and assuming this is a slam-bang, dead-simple, silver-bullet case, one would need to know at least two things;
1) What are the local laws and legal decisions concerning what constitutes consent to entry by police? As I mentioned above, in some places consent is satisfied by very little. (If you don't want the police entering your home, by the way, don't unchain the door for them unless you have found out for a fact that in your jurisdiction doing so does not comprise consent to entry. In some places that's all it takes, whether you agree it's right for your locality to have those laws or not. Take it up with your local politicians if you don't.)
In this case apparently she opened the door and not only that, in no way ordered not to come in. You would need to know the local law to know that entry is illegal in that circumstance. Do you know the local law there on that point?
2) What are the local laws and legal decisions concerning hot pursuit? Did they apply in this case?
Not having that there is no way anyone can have an informed judgment whether their actions were legal or not.
|
VincentHill
Needs a life
Posts: 6520
|
posted January 05, 2006 09:04 PM
Someone here missed something. There was NO Hot Pursuit. They were "looking" for someone that "May" have been in the area. Lets see you refuse to open the door when 10 dark closed automatic weapon pointing Large Men are at your door. All they had to do was say FBI and present their badge "Then" everything else they did would not have been a problem for her or me. Showing no ID was and is the #1 Problem here. Not having a Warrant that would have been a problem for THEM when they got to court. That is all there is to this. You can write forever but you cannot Justify this period and you nor them can make it right either. I posted this so that if it even happened to any of our members, they would be less surprised and maybe save their life.
____________
Made History @ Daytona and still one fast old man!!
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 05, 2006 09:24 PM
Edited By: trenace on 6 Jan 2006 00:05
How do you know the whole story of who they were looking for and why, that there was no hot pursuit, that there was no armed and dangerous felon involved, etc?
As to whether 10 men were pointing automatic weapons at a door when not in hot pursuit of anybody, or no information of an armed and dangerous suspect or fugitive being there, just for the heck of having their automatic weapons pointed at the door or, as it appears you're suggesting, for intimidation to achieve a search with no purpose (there being in this version no reasonable belief that a dangerous suspect or fugitive had entered the house), I will leave it to the officers on this forum to say how likely that is. There is something incomplete with this account at best -- I am not saying you are yourself in any way presenting less or different than you know, as I'm certain that's not the case.
That I cannot justify the events to you period I have no doubt, but as to whether the events are in fact justifiable in a court of law is not a matter that you've proven otherwise with the information you've provided. What's been provided is lacking to be sufficient to demonstrate that, and also, as per above, very open to question.
We don't even know that none showed ID or announced "FBI." We know from your account that she believed not, but I wouldn't be surprised if one or more officers here could testify that they've shown their badge and then people later thought they did not. It is very easy in a high-stress situation with many people involved to miss an individual thing. E.g., her eyes might have been at the agent's eyes or at a gun and not down to the opened wallet at hip level, or if no badge was shown which perhaps it isn't required to be, she missed the approximately 1 second that it takes to say the letters "eff bee eye" being distracted by something else. If they fear an armed and dangerous suspect may be on the other side of the door you can appreciate, I would think, their not wanting to devote more than the minimum attention and time to the ID-displaying or stating of "FBI," I don't see how you or I can know for a fact, unless just out to crucify the cops and therefore preferring to insist the worst possibility must be the true one.
What this sounds to me like is, there was a dangerous criminal in that immediate area, possibly reason to believe him to be armed, there was reason to believe he could have gone into your cousin's house or possibly (you have no info to the contrary) they might have received specific information though wrong that he had, and rather than being glad the thin blue line was there to defend, some complain despite no harm done, no intent to cause her any legal trouble, no collection or search for anything against her, but rather to capture a criminal who if in her house had no business there, and no proof of a single violation of law being broken in how they did it.
It sounds like they thought the situation was such that they were at risk of their lives should the criminal have invaded her house as suspected, but they went to do their job anyway, not to get evidence against your relative but to protect her and the public -- and their reward is now some would-be Constitutional experts call them criminals or "terrorists" and declare the entire country to be the USSR. How 'bout the words "thankless job" and "biting the hand that protects you"?
BTW, particularly with the owner having been asleep, sometimes criminals enter into a home without the owner knowing, yes? Her simply stating that no one was there was not proof, and they would have been irresponsible to take it as proof.
Without the facts of the case on who they were going after and why, and what the laws are there locally with regard to such door-opened, no-protest entries, I still say that condeming these cops cannot be because it's proven they broke the law, let alone that they were "terrorists" as the thread title claims, as that's not proven without having the vitally necessary rest of this story, but rather out of just wanting to, either that or just out of jumping to an unwarranted conclusion.
|
slug
Pro
Out in search of my mind...
Posts: 1433
|
posted January 06, 2006 04:28 AM
unles there was evidence of forcible entry (since they didn't just come in the door must have been locked.....) they would have NO reason to suspect that someone had entered that home wrongfully.
if there is a hot pursuit or some sort of 'police' action going on youwould think the local LEA would have at least had some sort of knowledge of that fact.... unless the person they were hunting for was a dangerous member of that LEA.
I am not all about tying the hands of the agency to perform LEGAL and LAWFUL searches and such in the performance of their jobs.
But i AM all about them doing the RIGHT and LEGAL thing.
You're wrong in the 'pursuit of a felon' thing though, hot pursuit, etc. NONE of that allows an officer of the law to violate the LAW. If they saw the person enter her home and went in that is one thing. but to just randomly start walking up to homes and threatening people, no.
If they were in hot pursuit, why did they stop and knock onthe door and threaten the homeowner?
|
VincentHill
Needs a life
Posts: 6520
|
posted January 06, 2006 06:15 AM
AMEN Slug +Infinity!
____________
Made History @ Daytona and still one fast old man!!
|
CrotchRocket
Moderator
Bracket Racing with Betsy
Posts: 8038
|
posted January 06, 2006 07:03 AM
Im sorry that the person mentioned had to deal with this but Vince was that woman a friend of yours???
I know nobody cares but I'll give my  anyway maybe sheding some light as to why things like this happen...First of all in things like this, people that were the victim in this situation usually tell half the story to make themselves look more like a victim But then again I dont know either!!!
There has to be a good reason as to why the FBI went to her house!!!...Doesn't anyone realize that???
Here's a scenario : Say you own a 2 family house, or rent an apartment in a 2 family...As far as you know your tenant or landlord are good people, never any problems...One day the FBI, ATF, Police or any Law Enforcement Agency show up and bang the shit out of your door as you open it in off guard in curriosity wondering what the fuck is going on then get treated like a bad guy...They ask you all kinds of questions as to how you live your life and you keep asking them whats this all about but they ignore you like the story above...Sure I would be upset to but after they find nothing and leave eventually you'll get some of the story as to why the Cops were there...Then you may find out that your landlord or tenant was into bad shit...After find that out how can you be upset with the Cops???...Why because they didnt treat you with kid gloves???...If you were a Cop would you treat a possible bad guy with kid gloves???...Or lets say you never get the answer you want and the Cops left with never telling you anything...Well then do your own investigating, ask your neighbors if they know something they will tell you !!!...There is always a reason for something done to someone!!!
Now, I can understand getting fired from your job because the CEO wants to save the company $$$ so he can secure his pension at your expense!!!...Then you have every right to act like a victim ranting about how fucked up he is and how your the victim in life!!!
Look we need laws like this because the Terrorists live here, they are Americans!!!...So we do need to have those laws on the books!!!...Yes, I dont always agree with politicians they are Jerkoffs, fuckin Hippocrates...But they do whats good not for us but for the country... We just happen to benefit at times!!!
Not sticking up for anyone, just telling it like it is!!!
As Col. Jessup said, you want the Truth, You cant handle the Truth!!! 
____________
Jason Miller StreetBike Seminars
*****DragRacers do it better, because they dont cut Corners*****
|
VincentHill
Needs a life
Posts: 6520
|
posted January 06, 2006 10:22 AM
Crotch she is my 1st Cousin My Sister if I had one. I hope people understand 1 thing if nothing else that I have tried to make clear. SHe nor I have or had a problem with what they wanted or needed to do. #1, even if they did not show ID Before the fact or show a warrant, We both are still OK, BUT AFTER THE FACT!! when they knew the house was "Clean" and that they were in fact at the wrong place or even if they were at the right place that turned out to be wrong, there is just no reason they could not have produced a badge and said we are sorry for the intrusion. !! We as citizens of this country that pay the taxes that allow them to be paid and have their training, they need to spend a little more on their "Bed Side Manner"
I handle Credit & Collections all day long and when I am at work I am in the I do not believe or trust you mode all day long. I have to tell the difference between the other employees and good accounts and not treat everyone the same. The word for this is "PROFESSIONALISM" They were not Profesional in their conduct period. This is not how you treat law abiding Tax Paying hard working American Citizens because if it is, then we might as will give up because the Government HAS become the Terrorist. (WHen you fear the knock on the door because the Government's people may be there, that fear / Terror IS Terrorism!!)
____________
Made History @ Daytona and still one fast old man!!
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 06, 2006 10:23 AM
No no, CR, ten top level law enforcement agents "pointed automatic weapons" at her door because they just wanted to "violate the law" and give her a hard time for no cause whatsoever. That's a believable possibility, isn't it?
Slug, you've got a circular argument: they broke the law because they broke the law... I pointed out to you however that you have no evidence that they did break the law. As for your claim that they 'threatened" her, there's no evidence of that in Mr Hill's post. She may have FELT intimidated by law enforcement agents having guns but you know what, only the most extreme anti-gunner would have it that therefore, "because people might feel intimidated" law enforcement may not carry guns or may not have them out in a situation where they expect they may encounter armed resistance.
Sounds you're just out to crucify the law enforcement -- even after all this is pointed out, that you have no proof of law breaking, you keep insisting it.
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 06, 2006 10:25 AM
Edited By: trenace on 6 Jan 2006 10:26
Mr Hill, maybe the fact that the suspect (presumably dangerous because of their feeling the need to have all those weapons out) WASN'T in the house meant that therefore he was somewhere else, and every second might count to have a hope of getting him?
I absolutely agree it would be much better if they had been more courteous. I believe that is very important for LEO's and most are good at it. However, it sounds like the agents considered this a very hairy situation, possibly very time critical, and so sometimes that leaves situations where each guy figures the other guy is going to take care of that aspect, while he focuses on the "keep alive and try to catch the bad guy" aspect. Could be.
|
TedG
Moderator
Posts: 8222
|
posted January 06, 2006 10:43 AM
As Americans it is our duty to question government about the practices and policies of law enforcement. Unchecked the US will turn into a police state, given the mentality of the our politicians and their love of absolute power. Especially the current administration and their ability to spread paranoia and fear to seize more and more power. Of course we should not tie law enforcements hands, but we must not give up our rights. Law enforcement holds us to the letter of the law, they too must need to be held at least to the same standard.
____________
Ted
2000 Green ZX12 sold
The fast color!!
Green 2005 ZX10R
2009 Concours Black ABS
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 06, 2006 10:59 AM
Edited By: trenace on 6 Jan 2006 10:59
Who would disagree with that? That is fairly self-evident (to all but the fans of dictators.)
But have you demonstrated they violated the letter of the law?
|
TedG
Moderator
Posts: 8222
|
posted January 06, 2006 11:09 AM
They may or may not have broken the law. But if they did, they and their superiors should be held accountable. One would think that in most states identification is required up front for the simple fact that anyone threating you with a gun drawn could enter your home having you think it was law enforcement when if fact it wasn't. Common sense needs to prevail.
____________
Ted
2000 Green ZX12 sold
The fast color!!
Green 2005 ZX10R
2009 Concours Black ABS
|
|
|
|
|
HOME
NEW TOPIC