3 ms·

Is this enough to be able to challenge the constitutionality out of SWAT team usage and no-knock warrants, based on the principle that we are innocent until pro

Is this enough to be able to challenge the constitutionality out of SWAT team usage and no-knock warrants, based on the principle that we are innocent until proven guilty. For example, in this case, the police were looking for one individual and found a family inside. Shouldn't the police treat them all as innocent instead of enemy combatants until they've positively identified the suspect? If we have to err between the safety of the public and the safety of police officers, that's an easy decision to make since hazards are part of the job they have chosen to perform. Using SWAT teams externalizes the risk and danger of the job. IMHO, it should be a high bar to meet to justify the use of SWAT teams in any situation. A judge should have to sign off on the use based on extraordinary evidence justifying why such excessive force is need. Once a warrant is acquired, do police have carte blanche to exercise it as they see fit?

maxerickson 12y ago
A judge would have signed off on this raid and was probably reasonably aware of the tactics they were likely to employ.
- fixermark 12y ago
  This is an interesting point, and depending on the jurisdiction, some judges are elected officials. It should come back on the judge that he or she authorized this abuse of power. Unfortunately, the feedback loop between the (hypothetical) judicial backstop on the system and the enforcers of the law tends to be left open by ignorance. It would be good for local political activists in Atlanta to make sure that the judge who authorized this warrant has a significantly curtailed career.
  - anigbrowl 12y ago
    OK, but the judge can only go by the evidence s/he is presented with. This judge might have been rubber-stamping SWAT raid applications, or might have been given sufficient evidence to think there was a serious risk of a firefight.
    - malandrew 12y ago
      Are judges required to make a statement on each warrant justifying their decision to grant a warrant given the information presented, or is it basically just a signature. I would hope that signing off on a warrant requires more rigor than a mere signature. How adversarial is the warrant granting process. Is it common for warrants asked for to be granted by default, or is there an adversarial process in place that forces the police/detectives to go back and do more investigative work if they don't provide enough substantive evidence to justify a warrant being granted. Furthermore, is warrant-granting by judges a matter of the public record. i.e. Can I go somewhere to lookup how many warrants a particular judge has granted, how many they have denied, and how many that were denied were eventually granted and the average number of resubmissions required to get those that were initially denied approved?
    - fixermark 12y ago
      Sure, but elected positions do not work that way. ;) Sometimes you make a bad choice based on circumstances that were partially outside of your control. An elected judge being overthrown for that reason may make their successor either more willing to question or less willing to take the police's evidence as sufficient.
- baddox 12y ago
  The judge likely knew that his or her job is heavily contingent on his or her willingness to sign off on raids like this.
simplemath 12y ago
>If we have to err between the safety of the public and the safety of police officers, that's an easy decision to make You're right -it was appallingly easy for them to decide that they can do as they please. Given the prison/police/military industrial complex fueling our massive, unprecedented in world history, Third Estate and the utter lack of any meaningful political opposition to it, things will get worse before they get better.

maxerickson 12y ago

A judge would have signed off on this raid and was probably reasonably aware of the tactics they were likely to employ.

fixermark 12y ago
This is an interesting point, and depending on the jurisdiction, some judges are elected officials. It should come back on the judge that he or she authorized this abuse of power. Unfortunately, the feedback loop between the (hypothetical) judicial backstop on the system and the enforcers of the law tends to be left open by ignorance. It would be good for local political activists in Atlanta to make sure that the judge who authorized this warrant has a significantly curtailed career.
- anigbrowl 12y ago
  OK, but the judge can only go by the evidence s/he is presented with. This judge might have been rubber-stamping SWAT raid applications, or might have been given sufficient evidence to think there was a serious risk of a firefight.
  - malandrew 12y ago
    Are judges required to make a statement on each warrant justifying their decision to grant a warrant given the information presented, or is it basically just a signature. I would hope that signing off on a warrant requires more rigor than a mere signature. How adversarial is the warrant granting process. Is it common for warrants asked for to be granted by default, or is there an adversarial process in place that forces the police/detectives to go back and do more investigative work if they don't provide enough substantive evidence to justify a warrant being granted. Furthermore, is warrant-granting by judges a matter of the public record. i.e. Can I go somewhere to lookup how many warrants a particular judge has granted, how many they have denied, and how many that were denied were eventually granted and the average number of resubmissions required to get those that were initially denied approved?
  - fixermark 12y ago
    Sure, but elected positions do not work that way. ;) Sometimes you make a bad choice based on circumstances that were partially outside of your control. An elected judge being overthrown for that reason may make their successor either more willing to question or less willing to take the police's evidence as sufficient.
baddox 12y ago
The judge likely knew that his or her job is heavily contingent on his or her willingness to sign off on raids like this.

simplemath 12y ago

>If we have to err between the safety of the public and the safety of police officers, that's an easy decision to make You're right -it was appallingly easy for them to decide that they can do as they please. Given the prison/police/military industrial complex fueling our massive, unprecedented in world history, Third Estate and the utter lack of any meaningful political opposition to it, things will get worse before they get better.