Tag Archives: warrant

When a man denied the police entry into his house because they didn’t have a warrant, one officer threatened to come back with a warrant and “shoot and kill” the man’s dogs.

Does this make you feel safer? When a man denied the police entry into his house because they didn’t have a warrant, one officer threatened to come back with a warrant and “shoot and kill” the man’s dogs.

[When the] police asked to search his house, Crinnian refused multiple times. He said they needed a warrant. Then he said one police officer started threatening him saying, “If we have to get a warrant, we’re going to come back when you’re not expecting it, we’re going to park in front of your house, where all your neighbors can see, we’re gonna bust in your door with a battering ram, we’re gonna shoot and kill your dogs, who are my family, and then we’re going to ransack your house looking for these people.”

How nice.

A man in New Mexico was illegally subjected to a cavity search, including a colonoscopy, without his permission and without a legal warrant as the result of a simple traffic stop.

A man in New Mexico was illegally subjected to a cavity search, including a colonoscopy, without his permission and without a legal warrant as the result of a simple traffic stop.

As he was being detained and probed, Kennedy said Eckert never gave doctors his consent to perform the procedures and protested his treatment, which all arose from the simple traffic violation. The entire ordeal lasted for roughly 12 hours. TheBlaze has reached out to the Deming Police Department. This story will be updated should the department respond. ,,,

Kennedy [the man’s lawyer] also said the search warrant — in which there were legal concerns anyway — was carried out illegally because it was only valid in Luna County, N.M. The anal cavity search and other procedures were performed at the Gila Regional Medical Center, in Grant County. Further, she said the search warrant was only good through 10 p.m., but medical records show the preparation for the colonoscopy started at 1 a.m. the next morning. In theory, even if the search warrant were completely legal and compliant, it was no longer valid.

The man is suing the city of Deming, New Mexico, the specific officers who detained him, as well as the medical center and the doctors who performed the procedures against his will. I hope their careers are destroyed by this horrible act.

A federal court has ruled that police must have a warrant before attaching a GPS tracker to your car.

Victory for freedom: A federal court has ruled that police must have a warrant before attaching a GPS tracker to your car.

That this ruling took several appeals depresses me. The language of the Constitution on this issue couldn’t be more plain. The government must have probably cause and a warrant before it can do these kinds of things.

What baffles me even more is that the police had probable cause in the specific case above. Why they didn’t bother to simply get a warrant makes no sense.

The state of Illinois illegally enters a beekeepers’ property, confiscates his bees, and destroys them.

The state of Illinois illegally enters a beekeepers’ property, confiscates his bees, and destroys them.

The story is very complicated, as the state believed the bees were infected with a disease that could spread to other bees. Nonetheless, they entered private property without permission or warrant, and took private property without permission.

Read the whole thing. It illustrates the complexity of freedom and law, while also showing the risks inherent with giving up our rights, even when it appears to be a good idea.

Judge dismisses case against cop who broke into home with no warrant & killed unarmed man

It ain’t just the IRS: A judge in New York this week dismissed a case against a cop who broke into a home with no warrant and killed an unarmed man inside.

Video below the fold. Watch it. It is blatantly clear that the cops had no right to enter the house and entered it illegally.

» Read more

A federal appeals court has ruled that the Obama administration does not have the right to search or seize a person’s electronic devices when they cross the border.

Good news: A federal appeals court has ruled that the Obama administration does not have the right to search or seize a person’s electronic devices when they cross the border.

The [Department of Homeland Security’s] civil rights watchdog, for example, last month reaffirmed the Obama administration’s position that travelers along the nation’s borders may have their electronics seized and the contents of those devices examined for any reason whatsoever — all in the name of national security.

The San Francisco-based appeals court, ruling 8-3, said that view was too extreme. Under the ruling, border agents may undertake a search of a gadget’s content on a whim, just like they could with a suitcase or a vehicle. However, a deeper forensic analysis using software to decrypt password protected files or to locate deleted files now requires “reasonable suspicion” that criminal activity is afoot. The court left rules intact that a “manual review of files on an electronic device” may be undertaken without justification. [emphasis mine]

Why is it that I sometimes get the feeling that this administration does not know how to read? They certainly seem all too often completely unfamiliar with the Constitution.

A federal judge has approved the installation of surveillance cameras by the police — on private property without a warrant.

Big Brother arrives: A federal judge has approved the installation of surveillance cameras by the police — on private property without a warrant.

Let me repeat that: The judge said that the police have the right to enter private property, without a warrant, in order to secretly install surveillance cameras so that they can record whatever happens on that property.

Doesn’t that make you feel safe?

Police once again raid the wrong house and kill a pet dog.

Police once again raid the wrong house and kill a pet dog.

What is it with these damn cops and their eagerness to kill dogs? There is simply no justification for this. First, the dog is someone else’s property. They have no right to destroy it, even if they do have a warrant. Second, there are many better and more humane ways to pacify a dog than killing it. With all their training, paid for by tax dollars, you’d think someone might tell them this.

Is the U.S. government reading your emails? The answer appear to be “Maybe.”

Is the U.S. government reading your emails without a warrant? The answer appear to be “Maybe.”

And the stance of the Obama administration?

The Justice Department and the Obama administration had a chance to settle the issue in April 2011, during a Senate hearing on the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. Instead, officials with both the Commerce and Justice departments failed to provide any clarity. Instead, a Justice Department official argued against extending Fourth Amendment protections — specifically strict warrant requirements — to email, saying that doing so would hinder investigations. “Congress should consider carefully the adverse impact on criminal as well as national security investigations if a probable-cause warrant were the only means to obtain such stored communications,” James Baker, associate deputy attorney general, testified at the hearing.

This behavior is not only immoral it is constitutionally illegal. It should stop.

The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled that refusing to open your door does not allow the police to enter without a warrant

Stating the obvious: The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled that just because you refuse to open your door to the police does not give them the right to break it down, without a warrant.

The Constitution is very plain about this, and that the police and prosecutors don’t understand it is very disturbing. Just because they want to enter does not give them the right to do it. Only if the police have reasonable cause they can get a warrant from a judge, but they need that warrant before entering.