Homeowner Sues Police After Pursuit Of Shoplifter Leaves Him With No Home To Own
from the not-too-far-away-from-'knock-and-talk'-meaning-'phone-call-and-missl dept
This is what was left of Leo Lech's home after the Greenwood Village police were done with it. Lech had done nothing wrong. In fact, he wasn't even home. By the point the local PD had decided to turn a standoff with a suspect into a one-house reenactment of the Battle of Fallujah, the only person inside was Robert Jonathan Seacat -- originally wanted for nothing more than shoplifting.
This was all fully justified, according to the police chief, because Seacat had opened fire on police officers during the standoff.
According to Lech's lawsuit, those shots -- five of them, nine hours into the standoff -- by Seacat were met by tear gas, flash bangs, and "72 chemical bombs." Sure, it turns out Seacat had a backpack (and lower intestine) full of drugs, but the police didn't know that when they began their assault. Of course, the complete destruction of an unrelated family's house was considered copacetic because no one died.
“I made the right call because we’re standing here instead of standing over a casket,” said Greenwood Village Police Cmdr. Dustin Varney.
After Seacat fired five shots through the floor at the SWAT team, the decision was made to "vent" the home so interior areas could be more easily viewed by police officers.
When it was all said and done, the PD had gotten their man, along with his drugs, weapons and five casings from bullets fired at officers. Lech was given back his house by officers who severely misrepresented the condition of the residence.
After the SWAT team arrested Seacat amid the rubble, police told the Lechs they could go home, but there was "some damage."
Lech was also given a check for $5,000, the "assistance" of a reluctant insurance company, the city's demand that he also build a new holding pond while rebuilding his house, and the assurances of the local PD that this destruction was not only necessary, but the best case scenario.
Things then got worse, according to Lech's lawsuit.
The Lechs suffered nausea for weeks from trying to rescue items from the rubble, and property inspectors sent there wore "full hazmat gear."
The Lechs had to move to another county. Leo Lech had to take a new job at a lower salary. The boy, D.Z., had to transfer schools and enter therapy.
All of this began with Seacat stealing two belts and a shirt from Wal-Mart. Twenty-four hours later he was in custody and a family was without their home or belongings. Lech is seeking recovery of costs sustained so far, along with additional damages for emotional distress, civil rights violations, trespass, and "taking without compensation."
The police continue to insist this couldn't have been handled any other way, but arrests of armed, barricaded suspects happen all the time without having to completely destroy the building surrounding them. What happened to Lech's house appears to be the end result of a PD with lots of surplus military gear and an excuse to use it. They rolled up in a BearCat and deployed a robot, rams, and explosives to turn Leo Lech's house into a literal shell of itself. And then they walked away from the total destruction patting themselves on the back for taking the suspect alive.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: greenwood village, leo lech, police
Reader Comments
The First Word
“Where are the good cops
When I read stories like this, people are usually quick to point out that the events happened because of "bad cops" or "overzealous cops".So where are the "good cops"? Did not one single person think it was a bad idea to destroy the house like this? Did no one speak up to say there should be another way of handling the situation? Were they all "following orders" to get the suspect at any cost?
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
This home owner and many more who read about this will now believe the justice system is something you run from and attempt to protect yourself from, not call for help from... ever.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Police departments are not "the justice system". They are the robust part of law enforcement. You have to execute common sense when to call them.
If you call an elephant because of a mouse infestation in your china store, it's dubious whether you'll get rid of the mice. But you won't have to worry about them damaging your china any more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
sad-but-all-too-true button needed once again...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
No need for exceptions here: "anywhere in the civilized world" is perfectly fine since it already excludes countries ruled by savages and street gangs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
LEOs have become a gang that neither enforces or obeys the laws of the land. They defend their own, no matter how badly they screw up. And they feel entitled to take what they want and do as they please. By any definition, they are a gang, a heavily armed gang.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
But he didn't call - did he?
Seems you're attempting to lay blame on the homeowner.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Many police think they are gods, does this give credence to the potential insurance denial?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Source: tried to get a township's insurance to pay for a motorbike their firetruck smashed. No dice. I suppose I could have sued, but cost/benefit probably wouldn't have gone my way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Governmental immunity for collateral damage
The insurance company refusing to pay may not be immunity but rather that the insurer (1) did not want to pay and (2) felt there was enough wiggle room in the contract that they might get out of it. True immunity would preclude any means of holding them legally accountable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Reading insurance policy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Reading insurance policy
It's what your forefathers did. Now it's your turn.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Reading insurance policy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Reading insurance policy
But personally, I think the responsible thing to do is stay in the US and work as hard as possible to improve it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Reading insurance policy
If you do this, your cash maybe guilty of ... idk - something where is needs to be arrested and incarcerated in the police bank account.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, sure, we should. The Norwegian consumer protection agency recently sponsored (on live TV!) people reading the TOS for 22 apps commonly found on smartphones. The reading lasted 30 hours. When I bought a house, it took me 2-3 hours just to lightly skim all the documents I was asked to sign (none of which I had copies of before), and the title company staffers were pissed that their schedule had been broken so badly. And that's just lightly skimming, to read carefully with reflection and completeness would have taken at least a day even if I'd brought a lawyer with me.
"Agreements" have gotten out of hand. If it's going to be necessary to read them in their entirety, they should be limited to no more than 1000 words in plain language. Alternatively, since an agreement in theory is a negotiated meeting of minds, the signer should be able to change the terms as they see fit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Title company, house purchase documents
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
That's certainly a problem, but there's an equally bad problem that happens when you do actually read the fine print: you probably don't understand it properly.
Those agreements are full of deceptions and obfuscations, and if you aren't an attorney qualified in this field and you haven't hired one to review the agreement, the odds are very high that you think the agreement is saying things that it is not saying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I don't know about the situation in the U.S., but a contract in Germany is a fixation and expression of a common understanding and agreement even if written up by one party. If you reasonably can be expected to be led to think the agreement is saying things that it is not saying, then for all practical legal purposes you are not bound by the things it is saying in lawyer-speak.
You have to exercise due care to make yourself acquainted with the conditions proposed by the other side, yes. But you are not required to learn what amounts to a completely different language.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Terms of service.
We used to have consumer protections here in the US, primarily stating that contracts with odious elements could be considered null and void. Bit by bit, we've seen those protections whittled away, so that now corporations can take ownership of anything you create with their device (e.g. sell images of your child take with a device camera to third parties for advertising), or brick it without cause or warning, or force you into arbitration if you feel the service is not what it was advertised to be.
Business models these days seem to be more focused around ensnaring consumers into lengthy commitments to terms-of-service rather than providing a service themselves that a customer might want to use to facilitate her own life. They're more predatory or parasitic than symbiotic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Terms of service.
However, no such restriction exists for individually drafted contracts.
In either situation, however, a contract is supposed to constitute a mutual agreement (which includes blanket acception).
The protection against surprising and frivolous clauses of course depends on their unexpectedness but since today's EULAs are all one big piece of incredibly offensive absurdly frivolous crap, it's becoming hard to pin down anything as obviously not binding any more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The police should have rebuilt their house to a better standard than before and taken them on an all expenses paid holiday whilst the job was done. In the meantime they should have paid the man's employer to hire a temporary worker to keep his job "warm" while he was away. Since he was absolutely not at faiult here and they were totally responsible and have the resources to do this it would only have been fair. His insurer should not have been involved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Not his, but this would seem to be a good scenario for the police department's insurer to get involved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Perhaps the cause-effect chain of Wal-Mart calling the elephants means Wal-Mart gets to be part of the lawsuit?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
True. And common sense says that you should never call them, period. They are too dangerous and often provide little to no actual help.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:LEO
Other points to ponder.
1.Driving is a right under the constitution ( from which the rule of laws are applied to a society)driving is not a privilege bequeathed to you by the criminal state in which you reside.Therefore your payment of monies to the state to
Possess a valid drivers license on your persons when you drive is a violation by the state of your constitutional right to move freely about your town,city or the whole country for that matter.
2.Registration of your personal vehicle to the state is another constitutional violation by the state or federal govts.
3.Having to acquire auto insurance is another.
4.Being ticketed for speeding is another.Speed limit signs only apply to commercial drivers and vehicles involved in interstate or intrastate commerce not the general driving public.
5.All the above apply to commercial operators only not the general driving public.
6.Research and know what your rights are concerning driving without a license,insurance,registration and even plates for that matter are a civil rights violation.
7.I don't portend to know everything about these listed examples but do your homework concerning your civil rights freedoms and liberties.You will be arrested for violating their (law enforcements,local,state and federal criminal laws) like driving without a license or insurance whatever the case may be.Eventually when stopped by Leo and with proper documentation,Leo will see a person who knows their rights under the correct law and not their brainwashed criminal law and will have no choice but to send you on your way.
Traditions are blinding,I did the same as my parents and they did the same as their parents not knowing their civil rights and just doing what the govt. told them to do without question,you gotta pay for this,you gotta pay for that
You gotta pay for these and you gotta pay for them.Its criminal taxation of We the People by the minority in power over us and it needs to stop.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:LEO
Um, no. You could argue that the federal government setting local speed limits is unconstitutional. But the federal government doesn't set local speed limits. States and local governments do. The commerce clause is only a federal government thing, not a state government thing.
Which part of the constitution says that state governments can't require registration?
You're delusional. Even if you were correct in your constitutional arguments, the fact remains that you *will* be convicted for speeding or driving without a license or without insurance. They aren't going to release you because of the arguments you list.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Funny how we still teach children that police are the go-to good guys
When police don't keep the peace and serve the public, that's also how gangs get started.
Soon it will be Jets AND Sharks week.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Funny how we still teach children that police are the go-to good guys
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Note also that he did not call them. He wasn't even home, or he'd probably be dead. They showed up and nuked the man's home.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This is why I -- an innocuous middle-aged white guy with no weapons, no drugs, nothing of interest to police -- would probably also run. If I allow them to take control of me, they might kill me just because they can, and because many of them are violent sociopaths who LIKE killing people.
The six thugs in Baltimore who killed Freddie Gray are probably going to walk. Nobody will held accountable for Freddie Gray's murder, and every cop watching will see that and realize that they too can kill with impunity. Just like every cop watching this story will realize that they can destroy property and lives at will because they won't be held accountable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Flattened
Here we see just another example of police behaving more like an occupying army than a police officers there to serve and protect.
The more we see of American police, the more we understand why so many minorities refuse to talk to them. Police unilaterally seizing (stealing) money, destroying property, shooting unarmed people in the back. The very same people who are part of the justice system never take responsibility for what they've done.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Flattened
This can't be overstated. I find it a pretty grim commentary that all of these police behaviors have been a problem for longer than I've been alive -- but weren't taken at all seriously until the cops started treating middle class white people in the same fashion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They Followed The Standard US Law-Enforcement-Dealing-With-Bad Guys Manual
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: They Followed The Standard US Law-Enforcement-Dealing-With-Bad Guys Manual
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Military tech doesn't belong with police.
If the ACTUAL military used tactics like these they'd be censured or prosecuted, most likely. But apparently cops can do it at home with impunity.
American policing is incredibly broken. And this is just one facet, another would be the for-profit policing where the cops are literally armed bandits who stop citizens and drain their cash cards on the spot now in Oklahoma. Highway robbery, by any definition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
Actual highway robbers wouldn't let the upper class get away unscathed.
Consider the police as social justice warriors: for trickle-down economy to work, you need to secure a drought below the top or the poor get swamped.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
Yeah, the complete opposite of.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
That is to say, situations that involve hostages AND barricades, or some other similarly dire situation.
Certainly not warrants, and certainly not a petty-larceny shoplifter who's gone to ground.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
I'm not saying there shouldn't be a SWAT with specialized equipment. I'm saying that the equipment needed for those situations is rather different from the equipment that cops are getting from the military.
I do agree that even if they were correctly trained and equipped, the way they are currently being used would still constitute an abuse of the public.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The cross-section between police and military gear.
There's a lot of crossover between Hostage-Barricade and anti-terror, which is where the intersection lies regarding equipment. The tools you need to infiltrate a situation, sort out suspects from hostages and bystanders, and neutralize threats with minimal collateral damage, and all the while not get killed, are all useful in both fields.
But granted, Bearcats are ridiculous. As is camouflage (subdued police identification patches! How does anyone think this is a good idea?). As are high explosives and heavy weapons. What would police use these for?
Some precincts have lethal nerve gas. Why?
Mostly we see armaments, which doesn't do a SWAT team any good without a fuckton of training.
I submit that's where SWAT turned into a bad joke. Rather than an urban specialist team that trains all year (continuously) for a few incidents, we have volunteer groups that do a couple of weekends (if that!) and are issued a rifle. ...And then are sent to serve common warrants.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
Police are being trained to treat their fellow citizens as a foreign militant enemy. We are not something to be protected but something they feel they must safeguard their lives against, even if it means they have to kill a lot of us to get "home safely"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
that exists in U.S. law enforcement,
one that helps explain
the
brutality and militarization that now characterizes so many police forces.
Since 9/11, cops have been traveling abroad
to learn
from one of the most repressive and dangerous
State forces in the world today
--the Israeli military and intelligence apparatus.
Political commentator John Miranda recently stated
that
police brutality is directly linked to the training
some officers receive in Israel.
"As for the increase in police brutality within the United States,
I think this definitely
can be pointed towards the Israeli training
that the Department of Homeland Security is giving all of American police officers.
Some police officers are actually being flown to Israel
for the training, not all of them but some,
and then those that are flown to Israel, they come back home
and they train
the head officers in the training
that they've gotten in Israel.
All these incidents, it is not just happening to African Americans.
Police are literally being brutal with all Americans."
At least 300 high-ranking U.S. sheriffs and police from all over the country,
as well as FBI and US Customs and Border Protection agents,
have traveled to Israel to learn first-hand the most efficient means of subduing populations.
The purported reason is counterterrorism,
but protests and crowd control methods are commonly discussed [...]
http://henrymakow.com/2016/06/%20US-Police-Nascent-Zionist-Army-of-Occupation.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not being discussed in the election.
The surveillance state
The CIA drone strike program
The CIA torture and detention program
Asset Forfeiture
FBI Overreach
Overclassification and government opacity.
Essentially, all hallmarks of an evil Hollywood dystopia, realized right here in the US.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Funny thing is even military doesn't do this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Funny thing is even military doesn't do this
To be fair, there was greater loss of life in the Bin Laden raid, which is what the police were trying to avoid. Also the Bin Laden raid was a stealth attack and this police action was anything but. Now they could have avoided all the property damage too and just waited the guy out, but it's not really a direct comparison.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
Your comment is insight in that the "Actual Military" would not use these tactics on a Civilian Target. Let's recall a comment made Dem Nominee Clinton on the safety and security of the Children, and Women on the Abbottabad Bin Laden Compound raid by US Navy SEAL Team 6.
There was nothing Military about this confrontation. It was conducted by untrained, Police playing with Military Technology - yes, it is technology that you need to be specifically trained in.
I say bankrupt that Police Department - they won't have a budget for grown-up toys.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
They won't need a budget, the feds will give the toys to them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What good is military gear if they can't play army men like that saw in that movie?
Someone else gets to clean up the mess and bear the costs.
The elected officials of this town should put the citizens first and maybe try to get someone who isn't an un superives 10 yr old to run the police force before he decides to try out dynamic entry to get back an overdue library book.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well color me surprised
Yes, it has in fact reached the point where I'm pleasantly surprised when cops don't kill someone, isn't police work in the US grand? /s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well color me surprised
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well color me surprised
Apparently. "This is your gun. It's empty: we already scattered the shells. Are you going to "hand it over" quietly or do you prefer to be shot in self-defense?"
Sounds like a bad movie plot but so far I've seen little to suggest that the police here are not acting from a bad script.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's put this into perspective.
If the local police cannot find a way to solve the very first event in this train of events without the escalation we have seen, then every one of them from the MIAH at the top to the MIAH's at the bottom need to be sacked and never allowed to do any position that requires any iota of nous and sense, including never being allowed to be night cart operatives.
For those not recognising MIAH, it is the AOFL for Moron-in-a-hurry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's put this into perspective.
Now the police's decision is starting to look pretty reasonable, isn't it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Let's put this into perspective.
The isle of Manhattan was more affordable than that at one time. Who knows whether this guy wasn't planning to use the T-shirt and the belts for purchasing the mining rights on a Native American reservation, then build an unstoppable drug cartel with the proceeds? I mean, he already had a backpack with substances, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Let's put this into perspective.
Well for a cost of say maybe $10 dollars (let's be generous), the police's decision is looking like they should be sacked for not even being able to count let alone anything else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Let's put this into perspective.
You're kidding, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's put this into perspective.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's put this into perspective.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, after demolishing half the building he was in and deploying an amount of tear gas that I assume would be enough to cover en average-sized football stadium...the suspect still being alive IS pretty amazing.
Seriously, 72 "chemical grenades"?!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm reminded of the old adage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm reminded of the old adage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I'm reminded of the old adage
Folk songs as PSAs. Hell, a live folk singer mocking the kid/Wal-Mart as an example.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: I'm reminded of the old adage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: I'm reminded of the old adage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I'm reminded of the old adage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I'm reminded of the old adage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wal Mart
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
idiot Americans
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lucky
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you lift something, destroy something.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No. "Fair market value" would mean that the homeowner would still be suffering an enormous loss. The city should, at a minimum, provide the replacement cost for the property destroyed and for the denial of the use of the property prior to replacement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: JWH on Jun 10th, 2016 @ 5:44am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just when you actually need a SWAT team, they suddenly chicken out!
Yet ironically, in these rare circumstances that actually justify sending a SWAT team into the building, that's not what they do, instead opting for the total destruction of the building rather than risking the safety of the SWAT officers (who give the impression of being too scared to face any real danger).
If police departments insist on routinely using SWAT teams for totally unjustified raids that endanger and kill countless numbers of innocent people, yet are too scared to deploy them for the very situations when their use is actually justified, then maybe SWAT teams should be abolished -- now and forever.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just when you actually need a SWAT team, they suddenly chicken out!
Great point. Why are they on a SWAT team if they're unwilling to risk being shot at?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I bet the people in this town feel less safe now seeing how their "law enforcement" blew up this house just because they could"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And the cops wonder why
And yet the cops continue to wonder why so many people consider them to be one of the biggest threats around.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't *Shoot At* Police
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This happens becuase cops are cowards
If they had any balls, they'd have gone inside and arrested the guy.
But that might involve some risk.
Or, they could have just waited the guy out. But that would be boring and tedious.
So, let's destroy a completely innocent citizen's house.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This happens becuase cops are cowards
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yet more evidence ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet more evidence ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet more evidence ...
No, that is exactly why they are chosen to run things..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet more evidence ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Where are the good cops
So where are the "good cops"? Did not one single person think it was a bad idea to destroy the house like this? Did no one speak up to say there should be another way of handling the situation? Were they all "following orders" to get the suspect at any cost?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pay attention class
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
He's firing at the cops, so they need to get him out somehow (peacefully or not)
The real travesty is that after completely and thoroughly trashing an innocent third parties house they did not want to accept any responsibility. The government can't come in, destroy everything you own, then say "that sort of sucks...not my fault. Heh, at least we didn't shoot you"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Well, obviously the government can do exactly this, since they just did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"At one point during the use of the flash-bang grenades, a badly thrown grenade bounced back and fell upon law enforcement, forcing them to scatter."
This sounds like a bunch of drunk guys on the range with a gun collector's arsenal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "At one point during the use of the flash-bang grenades, a badly thrown grenade bounced back and fell upon law enforcement, forcing them to scatter."
Makes the situation considerably more tense. Exactly because now everybody knows that the person pointing the gun has no experience whatsoever.
Which gets me back to your "bunch of drunk guys on the range with a gun collector's arsenal". Maybe the effect is intentional.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "At one point during the use of the flash-bang grenades, a badly thrown grenade bounced back and fell upon law enforcement, forcing them to scatter."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As an ex-communist-block resident...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Keystone Koppers
So much for the sanctity of a persons home.
Was the police response proportionate to the crime?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Keystone Koppers
So with an increase in civil asset forfeiture, you can be sure you'll get an accompanying increase of "Demolition Man" reenactments like this.
Like anybody applying for project funding will tell you, administration loves blowing big wads on few mostly idiotic but expensive prestige projects rather than distributing across a whole bunch of small improvements: the latter is much more work while being less flashy. Or flash bangy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Where were these guys a few months ago?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How many Swat Officers are needed:
100
1 to hold the bulb
99 to run around destroying the house to find the outlet...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tatical Battlefield Nukes?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tatical Battlefield Nukes?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
house what house
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ever seen whats left of a fly after you SWAT it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Never our fault
Perhaps they could have walked away?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Never our fault
And if the shoplifted shirt is used as the fuse of an atomic bomb, are you going to sweep up the rubble of New York?
Those parts could have been key to building a Rube Goldberg Doomsday Device.
And instead you choose to let a perfectly gorgious wall-punching ram gather dust?
You, Sir, are no police officer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Accountability
Enforcement needs to be held accountable each and every time incidents that can, and obviously, be treated or handled on an entirely different approach/level.
It comes down to accountability. If somebody writes you a suicide note, lives, you get them to professionals; you don't wait for the next time for it to happen, and then have an assessment of the conclusions, or have a brief discussion on what methods were used, over coffee. Treat the problem now.
This is a huge problem because it seems alarmingly to happen now 'all the time. We are really, more aware of these events happening at increased frequencies, because of our connectivity, but it seems to be bred into the Law Enforcement Culture. It is abhorrent mutations that have somehow survived this Law Enforcement Zeitgeist.
Accountability...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I get it now!
Or... they could have blasted some Nikki Manaj music.
He's have come out screaming.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]