More Kathryn Johnston Fall Out
From the AJC:
During the four-hour-long meeting, the crowd — which at times swelled to more than 300 — angrily recounted stories about drug raids into their homes when officers knocked down doors, armed with warrants that were unsigned.
They also demanded to know why the officers involved in Johnston’s death were still being paid by their tax dollars while they were on administrative leave. Franklin urged the crowd to be patient as the investigation took its course.
And Radley notes:
An Atlanta narcotics officer tied to last week’s deadly drug raid on a elderly woman’s home was the subject of a 2002 lawsuit that said he “fabricated” the events that led to his head-on traffic collision with a motorcyclist.
That rider, Samuel T. Gulley Jr., received a $450,000 payment from the city last year to settle his claims against Officer Arthur B. Tesler, the city and the Atlanta Police Department. The civil case was dismissed from Fulton County State Court after the settlement in September 2005.
That lawsuit alleged Tesler and other unnamed officers “fabricated traffic charges against Plaintiff, ignored evidence … and improperly initiated criminal proceedings” against Gulley to cover up the fact that Tesler was at fault in the accident that left Gulley with a broken pelvis and broken leg.
And this guy was still working as a cop?
December 1st, 2006 at 10:24 am
The further this thing develops, the more it looks like a dirty cop problem, and the less it looks like the violence inherent in the system. Maybe no-knock raids really are unreasonably dangerous, but then again, any tactic is unreasonably dangerous when it is left up to cops who have no business being cops.
December 1st, 2006 at 10:29 am
Not sure about the ‘dirty cop’ problem part. After all, what motivation do they have to no-knock raid the wrong someone? The only one I can think of is the ‘good job’ they get for number of arrests and taking drugs off the street. That could indicate a problem with the system.
Ayup.
December 1st, 2006 at 1:13 pm
They don’t have any incentive to intentionally no-knock raid the wrong house, however, they do have an incentive to no-knock raid houses they haven’t researched carefully enough if they know they can forge a warrant after the fact. That’s a distinct issue from whether no-knock warrants are still unreasonably dangerous, even if done by the book.
December 2nd, 2006 at 1:24 am
Here’s the deal, if a cop gets killed in a no knock raid the law should indemnify the person who killed him. Period. Then I would just bet my right leg that all of a sudden there would be a finding that no knock raids weren’t really all that necessary.
If you go charging into someone’s home armed you should be willing to take your chances that they won’t like it. I don’t know how many of you remember the days before no knocks became de rigeur, but guess what? More bad guys got caught fewer cops got hurt, and damn near no innocents were gunned down by scared assholes in ninja suits or soldier suits.
December 3rd, 2006 at 9:29 am
SA, perhaps you’d care to elaborate on what you mean by “indemnify.” I don’t think that word means what you think it means.