5
   

Ultimate "no-knock" raid in Az...

 
 
Reply Mon 23 May, 2011 08:22 am
http://abcnews.go.com/US/tucson-swat-team-defends-shooting-iraq-marine-veteran/story?id=13640112

Discussion on FR:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2723659/posts?page=26#26

Quote:

by ELLEN TUMPOSKY
May 20, 2011
A Tucson, Ariz., SWAT team defends shooting an Iraq War veteran 60 times during a drug raid, although it declines to say whether it found any drugs in the house and has had to retract its claim that the veteran shot first.

And the Pima County sheriff scolded the media for "questioning the legality" of the shooting.

Jose Guerena, 26, died the morning of May 5. He was asleep in his Tucson home after working a night shift at the Asarco copper mine when his wife, Vanessa, saw the armed SWAT team outside her youngest son's bedroom window.

"She saw a man pointing at her with a gun," said Reyna Ortiz, 29, a relative who is caring for Vanessa and her children. Ortiz said Vanessa Guerena yelled, "Don't shoot! I have a baby!"

Vanessa Guerena thought the gunman might be part of a home invasion -- especially because two members of her sister-in-law's family, Cynthia and Manny Orozco, were killed last year in their Tucson home, her lawyer, Chris Scileppi, said. She shouted for her husband in the next room, and he woke up and told his wife to hide in the closet with the child, Joel, 4.

Guerena grabbed his assault rifle and was pointing it at the SWAT team, which was trying to serve a narcotics search warrant as part of a multi-house drug crackdown, when the team broke down the door. At first the Pima County Sheriff's Office said that Guerena fired first, but on Wednesday officials backtracked and said he had not. "The safety was on and he could not fire," according to the sheriff's statement.

Tucson SWAT Team Shot Iraq War Vet 60 Times

SWAT team members fired 71 times and hit Guerena 60 times, police said.

In a frantic 911 call, Vanessa Guerena begged for medical help for her husband. "He's on the floor!" she said, crying, to the 911 operator. "Can you please hurry up?"

Asked if law enforcement was inside or outside the house, she told the operator, according to a transcript of the call, that they were inside. "They were ... going to shoot me. And I put my kid in front of me."

A report by ABC News affiliate KGUN found that more than an hour had passed before the SWAT team let the paramedics work on Guerena. By then he was dead.

A spokesman for Sheriff Clarence Dupnik said he could not discuss whether any drugs had been found at the home or make any other comment. "We're waiting for the investigation to be complete," he said.

In a statement, the sheriff's office criticized the media, saying that while questions will inevitably be raised, "It is unacceptable and irresponsible to couch those questions with implications of secrecy and a coverup, not to mention questioning the legality of actions that could not have been taken without the approval of an impartial judge."

Mike Storie, a lawyer for the SWAT team, said at a press conference Thursday that weapons and body armor were found in the home as well as a photo of Jesus Malverde, who Storie called a "patron saint drug runner," according to KGUN.

Storie defended the long delay in allowing paramedics to enter the home, saying of the SWAT team, "They still don't know how many shooters are inside, how many guns are inside and they still have to assume that they will be ambushed if they walk in this house."

But Scileppi, Vanessa Guerena's lawyer, said officers were "circling their wagons."

"They found nothing in the house that was illegal," he said. Framing the delay in providing medical attention as a tactical decision is "nonsense," Scileppi said. "There was an ambulance there in two minutes and they were never allowed in."

He pointed out that when Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot in Tucson, law enforcement let paramedics have access to victims in a far more volatile situation.

"The pieces don't fit. I think it was poor planning, overreaction and now they're trying to CYA," Scileppi said.

Guerena served two tours of duty in Iraq until he left the Marines in 2006.

"Every time he was under my command, he definitely pulled his weight," said Leo Verdugo, his master sergeant in Iraq, who helped arrange for Guerena to be buried in his Marine dress blue uniform. "I have a hard time grasping how something so tragic could happen."

He speculated that perhaps it was a case of mistaken identity. "At the wrong place at the wrong time in his own home," he said.

Vanessa Guerena is "devastated and distraught" and seeking justice for her husband and two sons, said her lawyer. "The main thing she wants is her husband's name cleared and his honor restored."

The oldest boy, Jose, turns 6 on Tuesday. "He went to school, came back and never saw his daddy again," said Ortiz. As for Joel, "He's asking, 'Why did the police kill my daddy?'

"We were so worried when he was over there fighting terrorism, but he gets shot in his own home," Ortiz said. "The government killed one of their own."




 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2011 08:24 am
Quote:
...Guerena grabbed his assault rifle and was pointing it at the SWAT team, which was trying to serve a narcotics search warrant as part of a multi-house drug crackdown...


I mean, what the **** is a "multi-house drug crackdown"??? How could there possibly be "probable cause" for that??

The war on drugs has to go.
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2011 08:40 am
@gungasnake,
That wrenches my gut...someone should hang for that .
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 May, 2011 09:03 am
@Ionus,
This is an extreme case of government out of control. Hopefully the town and sheriff's dept involved will be sued into oblivion but the main problem in the picture is still the "war on drugs". THAT has to go, whatever anybody thinks he's getting out of it isn't worth it.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  2  
Reply Tue 24 May, 2011 04:02 am
More:

http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2011/05/death-squad-damage-control-in-tucson.html

Quote:

...no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution (emphasis added)

The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land…. No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.

Sections 3 and 8 of the “Declaration of Rights” from the Arizona State Constitution’s “Declaration of Rights”



People seeking to defend the manifestly indefensible often sabotage themselves by disclosing critical details that undermine their argument. Mike Storie, the police union lawyer representing the SWAT operators who murdered Jose Guerena in his home on May 5, did this during his May 19 press conference in an attempt to assign all of the blame for Jose’s death on the victim and his terrorized wife.

As reported by the Arizona Star, Storie insisted that if the Guerena family had permitted the armed intruders into their home, those inside “probably … wouldn’t have been arrested." This is because the "warrant was not directed at any particular person, and Guerena’s home was not mentioned, but it was targeting whoever might be inside the residence...."

That is to say that this was not a legitimate search warrant, under the requirements imposed by the Fourth Amendment (and expressly incorporated in Arizona law through the state constitution). The instrument used as supposed justification for the armed assault was akin to the "writs of assistance" used by British soldiers during the years leading up to the American colonial rebellion......


Long article, more than a little bit interesting...
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 12:48 am
@gungasnake,
I have always wondered what if we made drugs legal, how would that change the world ?
hawkeye10
 
  3  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 12:52 am
@gungasnake,
Quote:
The war on drugs has to go.
The abusive police state has to go....
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 01:15 am

Those government thugs shoud be prosecuted for murder.
It reminds me of the assassin of Randy Weaver 's wife, while she held her baby.





David
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 01:17 am
@Ionus,
Ionus wrote:
I have always wondered what if we made drugs legal, how would that change the world ?
Yeah! For sure, if heroin were legal I 'd take rat poison b4 I 'd take that stuff.

America is supposed to be laissez faire capitalism.
That is what the Founders intended: the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.




David
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 01:26 am
@OmSigDAVID,
That's my impression, too.
0 Replies
 
raprap
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 01:38 am
This has happened in Indiana as Mitch Daniels is Governor.

Quote:
The Indiana Constitution doesn't require prior judicial authorization for a “no-knock” execution of a warrant when justified by exigent circumstances, the Indiana Supreme Court held Tuesday. This is the case even if those circumstances are known by police when the warrant is obtained.


Ref The Indiana Lawyer 5/10/11 http://www.theindianalawyer.com/justices-rule-on-noknock-warrant-executions/PARAMS/article/26339

I for one am glad that Mitch Daniel is no longer running for the nomination for POTUS, but I want it known that he may be maneuvering as a Midwestern governor for the second spot--damn activists courts--using public safety as a rationalization to trample the constitution....

Rap

gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 07:07 am
@raprap,
Indiana is on my short list of places not to live in America and there are several data points for that. Worst is that David Camm case which should be about to start up again one way or another. That one is on a par with the Duke LAX case and nobody seems to care.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  4  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 07:26 am
@Ionus,
Quote:
I have always wondered what if we made drugs legal, how would that change the world ?



The real problem is economic. The drugs one of these idiots would use in a day under rational circumstances would cost a dollar; that would simply present no scope for crime or criminals. Under present circumstances that dollar's worth of drugs is costing the user $300 a day and since that guy is dealing with a 10% fence, he's having to commit $3000 worth of crime to buy that dollar's worth of drugs. In other words, a dollar's worth of chemicals has been converted into $3000 worth of crime, times the number of those idiots out there, times 365 days per year, all through the magic of stupid and evil laws. No nation on Earth could afford that forever.

A rational set of drug laws would:

  • Legalize marijuana and all its derivatives and anything else demonstrably no more harmful than booze on the same basis as booze.
  • Declare that heroine, crack cocaine, and other highly addictive substances
    would never be legally sold on the streets, but that those addicted could shoot up at government centers for the fifty-cent cost of producing the stuff, i.e. take every dime out of that business for criminals.
  • Provide a lifetime in prison for selling LSD, PCP, and other Jeckyl/Hyde
    formulas.
  • Same for anybody selling any kind of drugs to kids.


Do all of that, and the drug problem and 70% of all urban crime will vanish
within two years.

That would be an ideal solution. Nonetheless simply legalizing it all would be better than what we are doing now. There were no drug laws in America in 1880 and there were no overwhelming drug problems. Nobody should need to be Albert Einstein to figure that one out.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 07:40 am
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:
Do all of that, and the drug problem and 70% of all urban crime will vanish within two years.
That and end all gun control laws, encouraging every citizen who can lift a gun to bear arms in self-defense
and teach defensive tactical training in schools, from young ages.

(The dangerously insane shoud be isolated.)





David
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 06:09 pm
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:



The war on drugs has to go.


Agreed!
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  0  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 07:20 pm
@gungasnake,
Quote:
Do all of that, and the drug problem and 70% of all urban crime will vanish within two years.

That's not very considerate of you...Police need anti-drug laws just like they needed prohibition . You dont want to go back to old days of pimp money do you ? Very Happy

You have a compelling argument, one I have heard before and find sensible .

Recovery from addiction is a lot harder when the other effects of it being illegal are factored in....cant hold a job, must commit crime to get by, prostitution, selling children, the list is as horrific as it is long .

By the age of 30, drug addicts have either died or given up drugs . Perhaps we could limit drug use even further by addressing the youth problem .

If we look at the gin/rum problems of earlier years, they were based more on very poor food and bad economic times . Most people did not want to take the drugs, they were suffering from depression .

You would still need anti-drug laws though to protect children from stupid parents and to stop the marketing of simply dangerous drugs that would be made illegal . Also I dont like the idea of smoking marijuana ...we are trying to get rid of a very dagerous drug now, tobacco and are having a difficult time .
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  0  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 07:27 pm
Hardly anyone smoked marijuana till the plastic rope manufacturers beat it up as an illegal drug to get a total ban so they could replace hemp rope with plastic rope . Then the whacko baby boomer generation took to it as part of their protests . If it was illegal it must be good . LSD was spread by the CIA of all people . Cocaine and Heroin manufacture have ruined countries apart from the user countries .

China recovered from severe drug problems forced on them by the west to offset the cost of importing tea and silk . They did it by coming down hard on those who were taking it in authorised places . So I suppose if we need to change our minds and ban it again, there is that precedent .
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 08:54 pm
@Ionus,
Ionus wrote:
China recovered from severe drug problems forced on them by the west to offset the cost of importing tea and silk.
They did it by coming down hard on those who were taking it in authorised places. So I suppose if we need to
change our minds and ban it again, there is that precedent.
Yea. I understand that the Chinese Reds rounded up
all the dope addicts and murdered them.
Thereafter, thay had no further problem with addiction.





David
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 09:04 pm
The basic cold, hard reality is that there is no drug problem as bad as the problems which the "War on Drugs(TM)" is causing.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 May, 2011 09:08 pm
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:
The basic cold, hard reality is that there is no drug problem
as bad as the problems which the "War on Drugs(TM)" is causing.
SO STIPULATED, not least of which is the sodomy of our Constitution.

The Founders woud have been aghast.
Even the King did not have THAT authority.





David
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

D.C. Schools try to poison children - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Ultimate "no-knock" raid in Az...
Copyright © 2014 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 07/22/2014 at 03:32:59