Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 01:02 PM Sep 2014

Man Shoots at Intruders, Turns Out it was a No-Knock Raid. Now He Faces the Death Penalty

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/prosecutor-seeking-death-penalty-officer-killed-knock-raid/

Likely alarmed by the men climbing through his windows at 5:30 in the morning, Guy and his wife sought to protect themselves and their property and fired on the intruders- in self defense.

Dinwiddie, along with three other officers were shot while attempting to breach the windows to the home, according to the department’s press release....

Since the shooting occurred during the break in, a reasonable person would assume they had not yet identified themselves as police officers. How on earth is this not self defense?

Prosecutors are now seeking the death penalty against Guy. He is charged with capital murder in Dinwiddie’s death, as well as three counts of attempted capital murder for firing on the other officers during the shootout, injuring one other officer. Body armor protected others who were hit.


And in case you were wondering...



109 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Man Shoots at Intruders, Turns Out it was a No-Knock Raid. Now He Faces the Death Penalty (Original Post) KamaAina Sep 2014 OP
Oh fuck, it's Texas BuelahWitch Sep 2014 #1
Hey, I only live in Texas for Ruben's Homemade Tamales in San Antonio. Rozlee Sep 2014 #61
Come to the Bay Area KamaAina Sep 2014 #65
OMG! I have had those... yuiyoshida Sep 2014 #70
Texas and California have always been frenemies over Mexican food. Rozlee Sep 2014 #76
Tamales Lilianas in East LA DBoon Sep 2014 #101
You can live in WA too marlakay Sep 2014 #106
Sadly because he was SWB, LibertyLover Sep 2014 #85
The picture wasn't neccessary. The decision to prosecute identified a Non-White citizen. nt TheBlackAdder Sep 2014 #104
In a similar Texas case, the homeowner/shooter/cop killer was not indicted. Comrade Grumpy Sep 2014 #2
Even your own property is not sacred for African-Americans malaise Sep 2014 #12
Sad situation.... Zeteticus Sep 2014 #25
Clearly, another marijuana-related death. Damansarajaya Sep 2014 #63
Public Trials billhicks76 Sep 2014 #84
Isnt this the same? hughee99 Sep 2014 #74
Apples to Apples and this person DID have drugs, the man wont walk cause he's black... uponit7771 Sep 2014 #82
Not Similar at ALL: In that case the homeowner was WHITE SorellaLaBefana Sep 2014 #91
Hee hee - he said "peace officer" Elmer S. E. Dump Sep 2014 #96
Gosh I thought Texas was a stand your ground State. gordianot Sep 2014 #3
You mean a Stand Your Ground If You Are White state AZ Progressive Sep 2014 #24
It's pretty clear that that's what they really mean! FiveGoodMen Sep 2014 #54
Great....a new acronym It's A Stand Your Ground If You Are White State. I.A.S.Y.G.I.Y.A.W.S.! VanillaRhapsody Sep 2014 #78
In spite of living in Texas you do not get to stand your ground. gordianot Sep 2014 #4
But Texans have a right to use lethal force to protect property. TexasProgresive Sep 2014 #16
Lethal force to protect property can only be used at the nighttime while on the property. Dustlawyer Sep 2014 #23
And while white. Louisiana1976 Sep 2014 #33
+1 uponit7771 Sep 2014 #81
Can you cite the law, please? TexasProgresive Sep 2014 #39
I don't have the statute in front of me but you can Google it. Self defense of immediate serious Dustlawyer Sep 2014 #52
In any case this happened at 5:30AM TexasProgresive Sep 2014 #53
Evidently the nighttime requirement has been dropped. I was quoting the basics from memory Dustlawyer Sep 2014 #69
There's an exception for persons engaged in unlawful activity. Also, there's a cop provision. Shrike47 Sep 2014 #93
My question is: in the wee hours of the night when a person is awoken by a break in TexasProgresive Sep 2014 #97
Sounds like a "good shoot" to me pscot Sep 2014 #5
This happens all the time, often for drugs, and often on faulty evidence. NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #6
Why would they want to do a no knock raid in the middle of the night? Maraya1969 Sep 2014 #7
Besides ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2014 #18
That really wouldn't help if the toilet tank was already full. iscooterliberally Sep 2014 #29
You'd only get one flush, and it wouldnt be a full flush either. 7962 Sep 2014 #32
It would prevent more than one flush, though. eom 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2014 #35
You can shut off the sewer too. (nt) jeff47 Sep 2014 #50
Why would they no-knock raid someone for minor drug possession? killbotfactory Sep 2014 #42
because he's........black? heaven05 Sep 2014 #88
Hey! They might flush Feral Child Sep 2014 #46
JIC I wasn't clear Feral Child Sep 2014 #107
If I am on that jury he walks! nt Logical Sep 2014 #8
Yup! nt avebury Sep 2014 #15
I'd vote for him to walk, too. Louisiana1976 Sep 2014 #37
Perfect time to use jury nullification in this case! The whole community should talk about this! cascadiance Sep 2014 #77
Time to start a petition at Care2. Milliesmom Sep 2014 #9
This was entirely predictable. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #10
YEP dembotoz Sep 2014 #13
If Zimmerman was set free, this guy should be free with no problems. "Stand Your Ground?" kelliekat44 Sep 2014 #11
+1 Enthusiast Sep 2014 #59
"The officers were looking for drugs, yet none were found in the home." valerief Sep 2014 #14
True. nt Cali_Democrat Sep 2014 #26
oh god toby jo Sep 2014 #17
80,000 SWAT raids a year Man from Pickens Sep 2014 #19
Right on! Louisiana1976 Sep 2014 #38
No-knock raids should be illegal LittleBlue Sep 2014 #20
Totally. 99th_Monkey Sep 2014 #21
My cop "friend" says they DO announce, but at the same time they hit the door. I dont buy it. 7962 Sep 2014 #30
They didn't announce for this poor kid. iscooterliberally Sep 2014 #36
I have never seen that web site before lunasun Sep 2014 #72
it is a war of american citizens noiretextatique Sep 2014 #95
Neighbors claim they did not identify themselves? yeoman6987 Sep 2014 #103
It was a condo, and some of the neighbors where actually outside when it all started. iscooterliberally Sep 2014 #109
That's like turning on your blinker only when you've already started changing lanes. winter is coming Sep 2014 #49
Sort of like this incident... xocet Sep 2014 #79
I agree, and the controlled substances act needs to go. The DEA too. n/t iscooterliberally Sep 2014 #31
Couldn't agree more. malthaussen Sep 2014 #41
As far as I am concerned they are illegal. nm rhett o rick Sep 2014 #56
WTF? SoapBox Sep 2014 #22
Conservatives: "Self-defense is only for white conservatives defending against crimes by minorities" bluestateguy Sep 2014 #27
Even if their only "crime" is having the wrong skin color. nt tblue37 Sep 2014 #48
Coming in thru a WINDOW?? Anyone would suspect a burglar. 7962 Sep 2014 #28
Agreed , my first thought is he probably thought someone was breaking in. cstanleytech Sep 2014 #73
if this goes bad in court, sounds like Presidential Pardon material for sure tomm2thumbs Sep 2014 #34
The president can't pardon people convicted in state court. Comrade Grumpy Sep 2014 #60
Hopefully Separation Sep 2014 #40
When conservative extremes collide: armed citizens vs militarized police n/t Matrosov Sep 2014 #43
You are only permitted to stand your ground onecaliberal Sep 2014 #44
Figures it's Texas. Hulk Sep 2014 #45
Something good happened in Texas today KamaAina Sep 2014 #47
you should have just posted the picture first JI7 Sep 2014 #51
Actually the picture wasn't necessary. nm rhett o rick Sep 2014 #55
the picture explains why he is being charged JI7 Sep 2014 #58
I understand. My point is that we could have guessed w/o the picture. rhett o rick Sep 2014 #67
Reminds me of this... FiveGoodMen Sep 2014 #57
I really liked that show. It was underappreciated and should have been around longer. corkhead Sep 2014 #86
Yeah, it was good. FiveGoodMen Sep 2014 #90
I'm shocked the guy's alive! BobbyBoring Sep 2014 #62
Police are special people, they don't live by the same rules serfs live by. Rex Sep 2014 #64
Do they record these raids in Texas? If so, who would have the video? Could the defense see it? n/t xocet Sep 2014 #80
The cops are required to share with the defense. christx30 Sep 2014 #89
Something similar almost happened in MN: no-knock raid, homeowner with a shotgun NickB79 Sep 2014 #66
This is SOP GETPLANING Sep 2014 #68
I hope the SPLC and the ACLU jen63 Sep 2014 #71
Where is the NRA? DBoon Sep 2014 #102
You would think. jen63 Sep 2014 #105
Sooooo fucking sick of The War on (Some People with Some) Drugs. kath Sep 2014 #75
Cops make up the "rules" as they go. The homeowners were within their right to shoot these intruders blkmusclmachine Sep 2014 #83
Texas, it figures heaven05 Sep 2014 #87
It is imperative that Guy is found innocent. Baitball Blogger Sep 2014 #92
you mean Guy...Dinwiddie was the cop who was killed eom noiretextatique Sep 2014 #98
Sorry! Thanks for the correction. Baitball Blogger Sep 2014 #100
Breathing while black Elmer S. E. Dump Sep 2014 #94
I hope real justice prevails, PumpkinAle Sep 2014 #99
Well, obviously the guy belongs in jail. krispos42 Sep 2014 #108

Rozlee

(2,529 posts)
61. Hey, I only live in Texas for Ruben's Homemade Tamales in San Antonio.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 05:10 PM
Sep 2014

Off Rigsby on the East Side. Delicioso!

 

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)
65. Come to the Bay Area
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 05:51 PM
Sep 2014

"Tamale ladies" selling homemade tamales out of carts are commonplace out here. One in SF hits the bars!

yuiyoshida

(41,765 posts)
70. OMG! I have had those...
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 06:55 PM
Sep 2014

They were so good I bought four of them, and stashed the other three in the fridge!!

Rozlee

(2,529 posts)
76. Texas and California have always been frenemies over Mexican food.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 09:16 PM
Sep 2014

I'll give Californians the tip of the hat over their chile rellenos. We can't make them for hell down here.

marlakay

(11,370 posts)
106. You can live in WA too
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 01:53 PM
Sep 2014

Anywhere the vineyards or orchards are there are lots of great mexican places, not just restaurants but cash only just like mexico joints.

LibertyLover

(4,788 posts)
85. Sadly because he was SWB,
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 07:58 AM
Sep 2014

shooting while black, I'm sure that Texas' castle doctrine will be found not to,apply.

 

Comrade Grumpy

(13,184 posts)
2. In a similar Texas case, the homeowner/shooter/cop killer was not indicted.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 01:09 PM
Sep 2014

He was white, though:

http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2014/feb/09/texas_man_not_indicted

Texas Man Not Indicted For Killing Cop in No-Knock Drug Raid

Post to: Twitter Digg StumbleUpon Reddit

by Phillip Smith, February 09, 2014, 05:19pm, (Issue #821)

It happens on a regular basis. Police conducting no-knock drug raids shoot and kill residents, claim they feared for their lives, and walk away free. But now, the shoe is on the other foot.

A Central Texas grand jury has refused to return a murder indictment against a Burleson County man who shot and killed sheriff's Sgt. Adam Sowders as Sowders led a group of law enforcement raiders through the door of the man's mobile home in a no-knock, pre-dawn drug raid on December 19.

The raiders had a search warrant for the home of Henry Goedrich Magee and were looking for marijuana plants and guns. But when they burst through the door, Magee, who was sleeping with his girlfriend, feared a home invasion robbery, grabbed a gun from his bed side, and opened fire, killing Sowders.

"This was a terrible tragedy that a deputy sheriff was killed, but Hank Magee believed that he and his pregnant girlfriend were being robbed," Magee's lawyer, renowned Texas criminal defense attorney Dick DeGuerin told the Associated Press. "He did what a lot of people would have done. He defended himself and his girlfriend and his home."

DeGuerin added that he could not recall another instance of a Texas grand jury declining to indict a defendant in the death of an officer.

The grand jury did indict Magee for the possession of a small number of marijuana plants and for having a gun while growing the pot plants. That charge is possession of marijuana while in possession of a deadly weapon, a third-degree felony. Conviction on a third-degree felony charge is punishable by from two to 10 years in state prison.

Burleson County District Attorney Julie Renken said after the grand jury decision that she thought the shooting had "occurred in a matter of seconds amongst chaos" and she thought the sheriff's office had done things correctly, "There is not enough evidence that Mr. Magee knew that day that peace officers were entering his home," she conceded.

Renken vowed to "fully prosecute" the remaining case against Magee, who has been jailed without bond in nearby Washington County. DeGeurin said Magee will likely be released soon, since he faces only the marijuana and gun charge.

This was all over some pot plants.

Caldwell , TX
United States

 

billhicks76

(5,082 posts)
84. Public Trials
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 03:12 AM
Sep 2014

We should hold those accountable who have corrupted our system of law by exploiting marijuana laws.

hughee99

(16,113 posts)
74. Isnt this the same?
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 08:48 PM
Sep 2014

Prosecutors went for murder indictments against the guy in your story and didn't get them from the grand jury. Now they're going for those same charges again. It will be interesting to see what the grand jury says in this case.

uponit7771

(90,225 posts)
82. Apples to Apples and this person DID have drugs, the man wont walk cause he's black...
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 02:55 AM
Sep 2014

... I do hold out a little for Nor Texas though... not much

SorellaLaBefana

(139 posts)
91. Not Similar at ALL: In that case the homeowner was WHITE
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 09:28 AM
Sep 2014

Which, in Texas, makes all the difference in the world.

However, the root of the problem is not simply the blatant and unremitting racisim of many police departments (any other recent news reports come to mind?) but the more dangerous and insidious embrace of military weapons and tactics by state and local police departments throughout the nation.

In either case, had the cops simply knocked on the door and announced that they were the police it is unlikely that anyone would have been killed.


Which is the Cop Killer, and which the Man Protecting his Family?

gordianot

(15,226 posts)
3. Gosh I thought Texas was a stand your ground State.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 01:10 PM
Sep 2014

Like Presidenten, no standing your ground if you are not the right demographic.

TexasProgresive

(12,148 posts)
16. But Texans have a right to use lethal force to protect property.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 02:06 PM
Sep 2014

The breaking and entering can be seen as destruction of property.

Dustlawyer

(10,493 posts)
52. I don't have the statute in front of me but you can Google it. Self defense of immediate serious
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 04:16 PM
Sep 2014

bodily harm or fear of death justifies the use of deadly force day or night as long as that fear is "reasonable." It is only in defense of property does it have to be at night.

TexasProgresive

(12,148 posts)
53. In any case this happened at 5:30AM
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 04:21 PM
Sep 2014

I would call that night, even though I am up at 5AM every morning even when I don't have to.


§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,


But 9.31 1A does not seem to restrict to night time if there is forced entry into dwelling, vehicle or place of business. It does say "unlawfully" entered but how is one to know that it is L.E.O. forcing entry-especially if one is awoken by breaking glass or wood?

SUBCHAPTER C. PROTECTION OF PERSONS

Sec. 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force. The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:

(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used:

(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;

(B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; or

(C) was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery;

(2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and

(3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.

(b) The use of force against another is not justified:

(1) in response to verbal provocation alone;

(2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or search is unlawful, unless the resistance is justified under Subsection (c);

(3) if the actor consented to the exact force used or attempted by the other;

(4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless:

(A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and

(B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the actor; or

(5) if the actor sought an explanation from or discussion with the other person concerning the actor's differences with the other person while the actor was:

(A) carrying a weapon in violation of Section 46.02; or

(B) possessing or transporting a weapon in violation of Section 46.05.

(c) The use of force to resist an arrest or search is justified:

(1) if, before the actor offers any resistance, the peace officer (or person acting at his direction) uses or attempts to use greater force than necessary to make the arrest or search; and

(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the peace officer's (or other person's) use or attempted use of greater force than necessary.

(d) The use of deadly force is not justified under this subchapter except as provided in Sections 9.32, 9.33, and 9.34.

(e) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the force is used is not required to retreat before using force as described by this section.

(f) For purposes of Subsection (a), in determining whether an actor described by Subsection (e) reasonably believed that the use of force was necessary, a finder of fact may not consider whether the actor failed to retreat.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994; Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 190, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

Amended by:

Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 1 (S.B. 378), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2007.

Dustlawyer

(10,493 posts)
69. Evidently the nighttime requirement has been dropped. I was quoting the basics from memory
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 06:51 PM
Sep 2014

from law school more than a few years ago. I have never practiced crimminal law, but that was one rule I thought I might need to know for personal use. I would never shoot someone fleeing with my stuff, but if they are coming in my house uninvited at night I would air them out if I could get to my gun and bullets in time.
Thanks for looking this up.

Shrike47

(6,913 posts)
93. There's an exception for persons engaged in unlawful activity. Also, there's a cop provision.
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 11:05 AM
Sep 2014

Interesting that the Texas legislature envisioned a situation where a cop is trying to get into your home, and outlined the force you are allowed to use to resist and when you can use it.

TexasProgresive

(12,148 posts)
97. My question is: in the wee hours of the night when a person is awoken by a break in
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 11:27 AM
Sep 2014

are they allowed to respond with deadly force? The situation I am envisioning is the cops say "police" and break down the door or window. The homeowner is asleep hears the crash but never heard the announcement and responds with deadly force. I don't think the police give enough time for a person to wake up after announcing their presence.

I really think that "no-knock" warrants are a disaster waiting to happen. I suppose that the reason for them is to prevent the destruction of evidence but if it is to prevent the escape of a suspect I think there are better alternatives.

Edited to add: This did not involve police but a repo driver in 1994 Houston, TX

Houston Man Not Indicted In The Slaying Of Repo Man

March 26, 1994

HOUSTON — A Harris County grand jury decided Friday not to indict a Houston resident who shot and killed a wrecker driver last month as he was repossessing his vehicle for being late with a payment. Jerry Casey, 35, killed wrecker driver Tommy Dean Morris, 54, about 3:30 a.m. on Feb. 25. Jurors apparently believed the testimony of Casey, who said he thought his truck was being stolen, a prosecutor said. Under Texas law, residents can use deadly force at night to protect their property. The case is the second this year in Houston involving a shooting by a homeowner. A businessman from Scotland was shot to death in January by a homeowner who said he was afraid the man was trying to break into his house. The homeowner was not indicted on murder charges.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1994-03-26/news/9403260470_1_homeowner-indicted-on-murder-houston-man




Maraya1969

(22,441 posts)
7. Why would they want to do a no knock raid in the middle of the night?
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 01:31 PM
Sep 2014

Do they really think that is better than knocking and then using that big bullet thing to break the door down? If they have cops stationed around the house who is going to get away? And what are the people inside going to do with a bunch of drugs except flush them and seriously how much can you flush in a very short time without clogging up the toilet and having all the evidence out on the floor for all to see?

Have any cops been killed in a raid like I explained?

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
18. Besides ...
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 02:18 PM
Sep 2014
? And what are the people inside going to do with a bunch of drugs except flush them and seriously how much can you flush in a very short time without clogging up the toilet and having all the evidence out on the floor for all to see?


Why not just shut off the water before the raid?

iscooterliberally

(2,849 posts)
29. That really wouldn't help if the toilet tank was already full.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 03:28 PM
Sep 2014

Why not repeal the controlled substances act and end the DEA and Law Enforcement's reign of terror in this country? That is what really needs to happen. The drug prohibitionists in congress are pro crime and anti-freedom.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
35. It would prevent more than one flush, though. eom
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 03:33 PM
Sep 2014

But I largely agree about the "war of drugs. Far better to legalize/decriminalize drug usage and treat it as the public health issue that it is.

killbotfactory

(13,566 posts)
42. Why would they no-knock raid someone for minor drug possession?
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 03:40 PM
Sep 2014

If you have so few drugs you can flush them at a moments notice, why would they bother sending in a swat team?

They risk their own lives and the lives of anyone in the house by doing this shit. How can they possibly justify this?

Feral Child

(2,086 posts)
107. JIC I wasn't clear
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 02:39 PM
Sep 2014

The above was meant as a joke, that is, that the homeowner would only have one joint, hardly an excuse for a full-bore SWAT assault.

Cops are emotional adolescents looking for any opportunity to break out their toys and play War.

 

cascadiance

(19,537 posts)
77. Perfect time to use jury nullification in this case! The whole community should talk about this!
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 09:17 PM
Sep 2014

... so that it would be hard to get a jury pool where someone doesn't know about it...

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/23929-jury-nullification-why-every-american-needs-to-learn-this-taboo-verdict

Did you know that, no matter the evidence, if a jury feels a law is unjust, it is permitted to “nullify” the law rather than finding someone guilty? Basically, jury nullification is a jury’s way of saying, “By the letter of the law, the defendant is guilty, but we also disagree with that law, so we vote to not punish the accused.” Ultimately, the verdict serves as an acquittal.

Haven’t heard of jury nullification? Don’t feel bad; you’re far from alone. If anything, your unfamiliarity is by design. Generally, defense lawyers are not allowed to even mention jury nullification as a possibility during a trial because judges prefer juries to follow the general protocols rather than delivering independent verdicts.
...
 

kelliekat44

(7,759 posts)
11. If Zimmerman was set free, this guy should be free with no problems. "Stand Your Ground?"
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 01:46 PM
Sep 2014

And I didn't even need to scroll down to know the guys race.

valerief

(53,235 posts)
14. "The officers were looking for drugs, yet none were found in the home."
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 01:48 PM
Sep 2014

He's black. State is Texas. No hope.

 

Man from Pickens

(1,713 posts)
19. 80,000 SWAT raids a year
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 02:29 PM
Sep 2014

SWAT raids should be reserved for active, life-and-limb-at-risk, crime-in-progress situations. Anything less constitutes a de facto military occupation.

 

LittleBlue

(10,362 posts)
20. No-knock raids should be illegal
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 02:34 PM
Sep 2014

It's ridiculous to expect people not to defend themselves when unidentified men are breaking into their house.

 

7962

(11,841 posts)
30. My cop "friend" says they DO announce, but at the same time they hit the door. I dont buy it.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 03:29 PM
Sep 2014

He doesnt care for my opinion on no-knocks. But he also knows I support the death penalty, so he cant quite figure me out.
I bet this guy didnt announce when he broke thru that window.

iscooterliberally

(2,849 posts)
36. They didn't announce for this poor kid.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 03:33 PM
Sep 2014

Anthony Andrew Diotaiuto
23 years old
Sunrise, Florida
August, 2005
Anthony worked two jobs to help pay for the house he lived in with his mother. He had permit for a concealed weapon because of the areas he traveled through for his night job. Sunrise police claimed that he had sold some marijuana, and because they knew he had a legal gun, decided to use SWAT. Neighbors claim that the police did not identify themselves. Police first claimed that Anthony pointed his gun at them, and later changed their story. Regardless, Anthony was dead with 10 bullets in him, and the police found 2 ounces of marijuana. Article.

http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/drug-war-victim/

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
103. Neighbors claim they did not identify themselves?
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 12:31 PM
Sep 2014

How would they know? If my neighbor was getting a visit from swat, I would have absolutely no idea if they identified themselves or not. Something doesn't add up on that at all.

iscooterliberally

(2,849 posts)
109. It was a condo, and some of the neighbors where actually outside when it all started.
Mon Sep 22, 2014, 11:46 AM
Sep 2014

Some of the neighbors were leaving for work. There was a big uproar and protest at city hall after this. The cops who did this were sued too, but they got away with it. It adds up. The cops who did this prey on young people. They are thugs with badges. You might be able to find some of the old articles that were written. Unfortunately the links don't work anymore.

winter is coming

(11,785 posts)
49. That's like turning on your blinker only when you've already started changing lanes.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 04:08 PM
Sep 2014

If someone shouted something as they broke into my house, I doubt I'd parse what they were saying before I reacted, especially if I were asleep at the time.

xocet

(3,870 posts)
79. Sort of like this incident...
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 11:46 PM
Sep 2014
Family Of Jose Guerena, Former Marine Killed By SWAT Team, To Receive $3.4 Million

...

On May 5, 2011, the SWAT team, primarily from the Pima County Sheriff's Department, raided the home of Guerena, a 26-year-old father of two. Guerena was asleep at the time, along with his wife Vanessa and their 4-year-old son. According to Guerena's wife, he woke to the sounds of men breaking into his home and believed they were home invaders, the family's attorney says. Guerena rushed his family into a closet, then grabbed his rifle. When police smashed open the door, they saw him with his weapon and opened fire, unleashing a barrage of 71 bullets. They initially claimed to have seen a muzzle flash from Guerena's gun, but ballistics tests later show his gun was never fired. In fact, the former soldier still had the gun's safety engaged, the police report states. A video of the raid shows roughly 38 seconds expired from the time the police briefly sounded a siren upon pulling into Guerena's driveway until they shot him. The family's home was riddled with bullets. Neighboring houses were hit as well.

...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/26/jose-guerena_n_3988658.html


malthaussen

(17,066 posts)
41. Couldn't agree more.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 03:40 PM
Sep 2014

We used to have this thing called the Bill of Rights... it had some good ideas in it, but since the law-and-order crowd didn't like it, it's now toilet paper.

-- Mal

bluestateguy

(44,173 posts)
27. Conservatives: "Self-defense is only for white conservatives defending against crimes by minorities"
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 03:24 PM
Sep 2014

nt

 

7962

(11,841 posts)
28. Coming in thru a WINDOW?? Anyone would suspect a burglar.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 03:27 PM
Sep 2014

I dont like it even when they come in thru the door, but how would you ever know it was a cop coming thru the WINDOW.

cstanleytech

(26,087 posts)
73. Agreed , my first thought is he probably thought someone was breaking in.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 08:44 PM
Sep 2014

Now I could maybe agree with an indictment from the grand jury in this case to be honest if it turned out that there was evidence that the officer had identified himself before he was shot or if Guy knew it was a police officer before he shot him but I havent seen or read that such a thing happened.

tomm2thumbs

(13,297 posts)
34. if this goes bad in court, sounds like Presidential Pardon material for sure
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 03:33 PM
Sep 2014

I hope they keep that on the back burner

Separation

(1,975 posts)
40. Hopefully
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 03:38 PM
Sep 2014

Hopefully there are people out there watching this and he has lawyers lining up for him pro bono.

A huge disservice to mankind if this man does not get a proper defense.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
67. I understand. My point is that we could have guessed w/o the picture.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 06:20 PM
Sep 2014

It just dawned on me that "wasn't necessary" can be taken more than one way. I took it for granted that since he was charged he wasn't White.

FiveGoodMen

(20,018 posts)
57. Reminds me of this...
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 04:28 PM
Sep 2014

Season 2 Ep. 18 of Picket Fences:

"System Down" David E. Kelley Alan Myerson April 1, 1994 1K18

A high profile murder trial in which the defendant is accused of murdering two police officers is transferred to Rome. Sheriff Brock winds up as the foreman of the jury that must decide the defendant's fate.

In the end, Brock talks them OUT of convicting(!) It was a raid by non-uniformed officers and the defendant had no way of knowing they were cops when he fired.

Unusually good episode.
 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
64. Police are special people, they don't live by the same rules serfs live by.
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 05:43 PM
Sep 2014

You are MAGICALLY supposed to know when a no-knock raid is occurring! Sadly he will get the death penalty. This is Texas and we LOVE to kill people in this state. Our governor likes to brag about our death count.

xocet

(3,870 posts)
80. Do they record these raids in Texas? If so, who would have the video? Could the defense see it? n/t
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 11:51 PM
Sep 2014

christx30

(6,241 posts)
89. The cops are required to share with the defense.
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 09:24 AM
Sep 2014

However if it shows the cops did anything wrong, I suspect some kind of computer problem will destroy the video. Purely an accident, of course.

NickB79

(19,114 posts)
66. Something similar almost happened in MN: no-knock raid, homeowner with a shotgun
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 05:53 PM
Sep 2014
http://www.startribune.com/local/minneapolis/26083024.html

First, the city apologized. Then it gave awards.

Eight Minneapolis officers received medals in City Hall Monday for their valor in a botched raid that the city apologized for last year. That isn't sitting well with the family shot at multiple times by the officers.

"I'm shocked that they're receiving awards for that night," said Yee Moua. "My family is a mess right now. My [9-year-old] son, who saw the shooting, still has nightmares and has needed therapy. They've ruined a life, and I don't understand why they would get rewarded for that."

The awards stemmed from a high-risk search in December. The eight officers -- who had SWAT training -- entered the house expecting to find a violent gang member. Instead, they found Vang Khang, a 35-year-old homeowner who thought he was being robbed. Khang shot through his bedroom door at the officers until he understood who they were.


I'd be giving the commanding officer the death penalty for sending his officers into this bullshit raid, not the homeowner.

GETPLANING

(846 posts)
68. This is SOP
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 06:22 PM
Sep 2014

The prosecution is trying to scare the defendant into pleading guilty at the trial in exchange for life rather than death. As usual in the American "justice" system, it isn't a matter of justice, it's a matter of winning. Even if a man who was defending his family against armed intruders crashing through his windows in the middle of the night has to die. Heaven forbid the prosecutor has a loss on his record.

jen63

(813 posts)
71. I hope the SPLC and the ACLU
Fri Sep 19, 2014, 07:04 PM
Sep 2014

are aware of this case, so this man can have some good legal counsel. This is beyond unbelievable.

DBoon

(22,288 posts)
102. Where is the NRA?
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 12:27 PM
Sep 2014

You think they would defend the rights of a private citizen against jack booted government thugs

 

heaven05

(18,124 posts)
87. Texas, it figures
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 09:10 AM
Sep 2014

Texas, Florida, Mississippi, Missouri, Utah, NYC, oh hell, USA, it figures......

Baitball Blogger

(46,576 posts)
92. It is imperative that Guy is found innocent.
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 09:51 AM
Sep 2014

Last edited Sat Sep 20, 2014, 12:18 PM - Edit history (1)

Otherwise, the ramifications to the rest of us will be devastating. It means that the powers that be can decide who gets to defend their castle, and who does not.

In the wake of the Trayvon Martin and Mike Brown incidents, can you see a world where people of white persuasion can shoot any person of brown skin, anywhere, based on police protocol and Stand your Ground; and brown skinned citizens cannot even defend themselves in their own home? That's the message a guilty verdict will bring.

Edited to correct name.

PumpkinAle

(1,210 posts)
99. I hope real justice prevails,
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 11:41 AM
Sep 2014

but as others have pointed out Guy is black, this is Texas and history keeps repeating itself on those two points.

We hear of the police going into the wrong houses on these stupid dumbass warrants - with the militarization of the police it can only get worse.

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
108. Well, obviously the guy belongs in jail.
Sat Sep 20, 2014, 02:48 PM
Sep 2014

First off, he owns guns, so right away he's "iffy" in terms of mental fitness. Anybody that would own a gun, knowing the multiple studies that show how dangerous it is to the residents of the house, can't be too rational. Obviously he's a threat to his family and anybody else he gets angry at.

Not only that, but he keeps them where they can be quickly accessed. Obviously, then, he's a gun nut, an ammosexual, a guy looking for a chance to kill with legal impunity. To protect ourselves, we have to put people like him in jail whenever possible.






























Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Man Shoots at Intruders, ...