Utterly Meaningless

Cops follow a set of rules – and the top rule is “make sure I go home after work”. That means every single home they enter while executing a warrant has a crackhead with a gun behind a bed or around a corner, until the house is cleared. That includes all the 74 yr old women’s houses.

If you go up to any random cop and ask them for stories about threats to their safety coming from strange places (like old ladies), you’ll get plenty of stories. My local police chief has the story about the only time he was injured by someone in handcuffs. 14 yr old girl.

I wonder if this lady will actually file a complaint.

Then why not just shoot everyone on sight? Or, better yet, pretend they’re Philly cops and firebomb the house from the safety of a helicopter.

I hope she gets a million dollar settlement…

If the lady had been who they were after, I’d agree with you, Rob, but seeing as though she had done absolutely nothing wrong except have the bad fortune to be related to someone who they were looking for, and who hadn’t even lived/visited there in quite some time (if I remember properly – I read the article earlier and it’s not completely clearly in my mind still).

So basically they ransacked her house and roughed her up based on … well … pretty much nothing. Even if it could be argued that it was necessary to handcuff her, etc., to ensure their safety, if the rest of what she alleges is true, I can’t see how it is, in any way, necessary:
” During the home invasion, she said, the agents busted her front and bathroom doors, broke a fan, kicked out a window in her dining room, cracked her large-screen television set and snatched a fire alarm out of the wall.”

Because, you know, the grandson might have been hiding in the TV…

“So basically they ransacked her house and roughed her up based on … well … pretty much nothing.”

Well, they ransacked her house and roughed her up based on a search warrant, which was issued by a judge, who knows full well what happens when cops execute a search warrant. It’s a pretty decent check and balance, because the judiciary and law enforcement often don’t see eye to eye.

“Then why not just shoot everyone on sight?”

Please understand, I’m not defending the cops, just trying to explain why they (allegedly) did what they (allegedly) did. Actually, even the word ‘allegedly’ doesn’t belong until someone actually files a complaint. Finding truth by reading what some reporter wrote isn’t always a fruitful endeavor.

One very legitimate gripe that you and I probably share – when someone does file a complaint against cops, it’s investigated by other cops. There’s way more room for abuse there than I’m comfortable with.