The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights > Legal and Political

 
 
Thread Tools
Old August 13, 2006, 12:07 PM   #26
gdm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 17, 2005
Posts: 319
"I agree. In this case, the murder could have been stopped by having arrested all the cops before the incident happened, or by throwing a flashbang into their "planning room" session, then shooting each of them three times, just to make sure that they didn't go forward with their murder".


caught me off guard on that one.. coffee everywhere and not a drop to drink.


im sure later after they tear apart the house that an arsenal will be found, a kilo of coke with their names clearly written on the bag and a an entire meth cooking lab discoverd in the cellar.
gdm is offline  
Old August 13, 2006, 01:10 PM   #27
DasBoot
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2005
Location: South Florida
Posts: 700
No mention of it's being the wrong address so there must be more to this.

Quote:
They don't have the time and resources to go around town going through everyone's trash, do they?
No, they don't.
So there's probably a good reason for the initial warrant.
More facts needed.

Quote:
Don't worry, a small baggie of drugs will be found - curiously enough the correct size to fit into a tactical cargo pocket - and that will justify the whole thing!
Now there's an unbiased opinion!
DasBoot is offline  
Old August 13, 2006, 01:25 PM   #28
Rich Lucibella
Staff
 
Join Date: October 6, 1998
Location: South Florida
Posts: 10,164
Yup, we're definitely not getting the whole story. The whole court case is probably a sham...after all:
- A warrant was issued...they don't just hand those out on hearsay and rumor, you know.

- The cops did a dead of night raid...these teams have better things to do than bust down doors in the middle of the night for minor warrant service. She was probably dealing drugs anyway....a Death Sentence is appropriate.

- She had a gun...At Four AM any law abiding citizen would be able to discern and identify the well known sounds of a police ram and flashbang to identify that the intruders were "friendlies".

- Her husband wasn't armed....Proof Positive that it was a druggie house. He was probably zoned out or flushing the goods while she laid down covering fire.

Serves her right, I'll bet. And now the family's gonna claim she was a "victim".

Nothing to see here, folks. Move along now.

Rich
__________________
S.W.A.T. Magazine
Weapons, Training and Tactics for the Real World
Join us at TFL or at AR15.com or on Facebook
Rich Lucibella is offline  
Old August 13, 2006, 01:32 PM   #29
Dreadnought
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 3, 2006
Location: Willy
Posts: 318
Ok, the original post quoted from the article states the shooting took place on Jan. 16, 2005. It took 20 months for this to get to trial? Or this only the civil suit after the criminal courts found the defendants not guilty? The only nail in the coffin seems to be the excessive use of force, being Artson's final shot.
The only thing that keeps stuff like that from happening is tireless practice, otherwise the "we were in a house and someone pointed a gun at me and I shot him/her because of the adrenaline and nerves" defense gets kind of old. I am no cop, let alone a SWAT member, but I know the way to keep things from being reactionary instead of calculated is incessant practice. I wonder if Artson was a rookie/green SWAT member and if he has been involved in other shootings.

Don't get me wrong, I support law enforcement fully, those guys are in harm's way all the time. But this case seems like it is gold diggers going after the cops after the case was dismissed from criminal court, otherwise how did it take nearly two years to get a trial?
__________________
"NO YELLING ON THE BUS!"
Dreadnought is offline  
Old August 13, 2006, 01:36 PM   #30
Rich Lucibella
Staff
 
Join Date: October 6, 1998
Location: South Florida
Posts: 10,164
Quote:
The only thing that keeps stuff like that from happening is tireless practice
Incorrect. Practice is only ONE way to keep stuff like that from happening. A BETTER way is to curb the use of No-Knocks in the first place. No-Knocks like this one put good cops in needless danger, get innocent citizens killed and undermine the fundamental guarantees of the Bill of Rights for all of us.
Rich
__________________
S.W.A.T. Magazine
Weapons, Training and Tactics for the Real World
Join us at TFL or at AR15.com or on Facebook
Rich Lucibella is offline  
Old August 13, 2006, 02:06 PM   #31
gdm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 17, 2005
Posts: 319
"Incorrect. Practice is only ONE way to keep stuff like that from happening. A BETTER way is to curb the use of No-Knocks in the first place. No-Knocks like this one put good cops in needless danger, get innocent citizens killed and undermine the fundamental guarantees of the Bill of Rights for all of us".
Rich


bingo!right on!yes.. way!.




Id vote "rich for the next president"...we need a change.people are getting tired of all the shennanigans these days.I know I am.
gdm is offline  
Old August 13, 2006, 03:36 PM   #32
Roberta X
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2, 2006
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 165
Battering down doors in the dead of night and tossing in flash-bangs is not right. Yes, even if the house is full of tweakin' Commie Islamofascist bomber child-abusers illegally converting longarms to full-auto while mainlining decaf Dran-o, it's not right.

Among other things, door-kicking and flash-bangs make it more likely the officers are gonna pop a cap in the bad guy's hapless little innocent victims, who -- last time I checked -- were supposed to be the real focus of all this, with chalkin' up points by taking out or apprehending malefactors the second or third objective on the list, behind "saving the immediate victims" and "protecting society."

If "officer safety" is the excuse for tactics better suited to the Battle of Stalingrad, why not be safer still and get the suspects one-by-one as they shop for groceries? Why not surround the house with armed and armored Officers Of The Law and call 'em up on the phone? Few people -- and fewer tweakers -- are set up for a siege. Cut the power and water and wait a few days. Yeah, it's not exciting. But you end up burying fewer grandmothers.

On the topic of "tweaking:" there've been no few reports of LEOs using, ahem, performance-enhancing drugs in much the same manner as NFL players. Funny thing, those reports and mistakenly-dead no-knocks rise at about the same time and with similar rates. Connection? Well, a fellow on steroids is usually not much minded to sit and wait.... Perhaps it's all Merely A Coincidence.

You betcha.
__________________
Proud rider of a 2006 Bajaj Chetak motorscooter. --And just bought a small motorcycle. I've got the fever bad.

Girl Gunblogger: The Adventures Of Roberta X

Last edited by Roberta X; August 13, 2006 at 04:21 PM.
Roberta X is offline  
Old August 13, 2006, 04:11 PM   #33
JR47
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 9, 2005
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 2,228
Instead of generalizing about what's right and wrong, all the time mixing this instance into the generalizations, let's see what the facts are.

The area surrounding Baltimore resembles a war zone in many places. Until someone states the facts of the case for us, we're all too many of us ready to drag up any and every tin-foil hat scheme we've ever heard, happily piling on.

There's no way that the Baltimore County Police Department randomly chooses trash cans to rumage through. The fact that they had enough evidence to obtain a warrant also calls many of the statements here into doubt. As to why the officer shot the woman, and the sequence of those shots, is information that has already been given to a Grand Jury. Their decision is obvious.

You're listening to the opening salvo of a civil suit. Of course the attorney wants to make it sound as terrible as possible. Is there some reason that many here would accept that statement as any more true than that of the police, who have already had a Grand Jury investigation?
JR47 is offline  
Old August 13, 2006, 04:33 PM   #34
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,488
I also dislike speculation, so what are the facts that are known?
  • The police conducted a no-knock raid in the wee hours of the morning;
  • A woman standing in her bedroom with a gun was killed by the police;
  • The other people in the house were charged with misdemeanor drug possession and released on their on recognizance, and;
  • [A bit of negative evidence] I have seen no claims that anyone in the house had a criminal history.
What bothers me is why there was a no-knock raid in the first place. It does not appear that the suspects were hardened, repeat offenders. And the resulting charges show that the suspects were not big-time drug dealers. So why call in SWAT?

While there is no evidence, I get pretty nervous over the possibility that the police may have felt that a no-knock SWAT raid was warranted because they might have known that someone in the house owned a gun.
gc70 is offline  
Old August 13, 2006, 11:50 PM   #35
Wildcard
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2001
Location: midwest
Posts: 782
Quote:
What bothers me is why there was a no-knock raid in the first place.
Come on, they have to justify the existence of the ninja team, all the ninja cool toys, or else the future budget will suffer...Plus, its cool, and, they got to go home at the end of their shift. :barf:
Wildcard is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 02:23 AM   #36
Rich Lucibella
Staff
 
Join Date: October 6, 1998
Location: South Florida
Posts: 10,164
Quote:
information that has already been given to a Grand Jury
Negative. According to the news report the Prosecutor refused to prosecute. The Grand Jury never heard the case.
Rich
__________________
S.W.A.T. Magazine
Weapons, Training and Tactics for the Real World
Join us at TFL or at AR15.com or on Facebook
Rich Lucibella is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 09:50 AM   #37
JR47
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 9, 2005
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 2,228
Thank you, sir. In that case, the DA had to review all of the pertinent information?

There is still not enough information available as to the reason for the warrant service proceedure. Until we moved to Georgia last June, we lived about 20-25 miles from Balto. Co. They were known more for PC behavior in the PD than for vigorous enforcement of law. It may have been that PC factor that turned this into such a problem. The senior staff of the BCPD are all political appointees, and set department SOP. They may have specified the type of response in that SOP.

As I said, there isn't enough information here to judge, much less convict, anyone for the actions.
JR47 is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 10:36 AM   #38
Rich Lucibella
Staff
 
Join Date: October 6, 1998
Location: South Florida
Posts: 10,164
JR-
I, too, spent 4 years in Bawlamer. It's hardly East LA.

But that isn't the issue; nor is the issue our ability to put these cops on trial based on the info available. Respectfully, the ISSUE, sir, is the fact that a mother is dead; shot to death in her own bedroom in the middle of the night by agents of the government sworn to protect and serve. And what were the fruits of the raid? One Mis-D, released on recognizance, drug bust.

Now THAT is a subject for which we have enough info to properly discuss, analyze and come to conclusion. My conclusions are simple:
1) The cops never should have been there under these circumstances in the first place; and it happens FAR too often, for increasingly diminishing fruits of the search;

2) THIS woman never should have been placed in a position of having to identify the invaders of her bedroom from a dead sleep in the first place;

3) The officers may have acted appropriately, but only if they can sleep well at night with the excuse that they "were only following orders";

4) The State let this family down and killed a Mother needlessly. Her life is over; no more sunrises; her children will grow up without her.

5) Too many, in the public and even on this board, encourage these types of raids by dismissing lost lives, such as Cheryl Noel's, under the guise of "Well, she must have done something wrong". Just how low do we want to drop the bar to warrant a summary sentence of DEATH?

Rich
__________________
S.W.A.T. Magazine
Weapons, Training and Tactics for the Real World
Join us at TFL or at AR15.com or on Facebook
Rich Lucibella is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 10:45 AM   #39
Heist
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 6, 2005
Location: ETN, Again
Posts: 760
In four years, the winds will change slightly, and they'll act as if they've never felt differently.

It might take SWAT raids over a 'tip' that someone had a shotgun barrel 1/2" too short, though.
Heist is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 01:00 PM   #40
Epyon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 2006
Location: Awesome, Colorado
Posts: 700
To DonR101395...

Quote:
If there is dope and kids in the house how could you not see that as child abuse. Not to mention if you are addicted to illegal drugs there is no such thing as a legal gun in your posession. I don't believe that is what the cops were thinking in this case, but I'm talking about your comment now and not the article. Or did the neighbor throw their dope in these peoples trash can?
Replace dope with alcohol or tobacco, would you still consider it not to be child abuse because it's legal? How do we even know if this woman was addicted? What if she just smoked weed because she enjoys it in moderation like anyone would with alcohol or tobacco? Also, I must say DonR101395 if you woke up STARTLED in the middle of the night with no announcment that police are at your door, and all you hear are the flashbang and that battering ram wouldn't you go armed thinking it was a BG because you don't know it's the police until it's too late? Who's to say a BG couldn't construct his own version of a flashbang if he knew his chemistry? Also, I believe what liliysdad was trying to say is that there are bigger crimes to take care of than to raid someone's home just over something so trivial, should it turn out that this woman was not a dealer and the "trace amount of drugs" is just that, a small amount for personal consumption not intended to harm anyone. Also, I'm sure anyone in LE knows this personally that sometimes a bad cop will plant drugs on people just for an excuse to bust them.

Liliysdad I totally agree with what you have to say, there are bigger problems out there than recreational drug users that harm no one. So far, it does seem that this was overkill, and what I wish to know is what was the warrant for when they raided the house? I don't mean to take sides here, but if LE are supposed to be the good guys they have to follow and operate by the procedures they were trained under and to follow the LAW, not go blasting into houses with the "Kill 'em all, let god sort 'em out" attitude. Now suppose this warrant was to ambush a house that had an illegal cache of weapons, and amounts of drugs that qualify as "intent to sell" that was run by gang members, and it was positively identified as such, then I could understand that attitude in order for LE to remain safe while making arrests.


Epyon
__________________
Vote Epyon for president in 2008, if you vote for Epyon all of your wildest dreams will come true: This campaign was brought to you by Epyon; funded in part by the Pizza Party, Surprise Party, Birthday Party, and Slumber Party.
Epyon is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 01:55 PM   #41
DonR101395
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 30, 2005
Location: NWFL
Posts: 3,029
Quote:
I don't mean to take sides here, but if LE are supposed to be the good guys they have to follow and operate by the procedures they were trained under and to follow the LAW, not go blasting into houses with the "Kill 'em all, let god sort 'em out" attitude.
If you go back to my original post I said how about we get both sides of the story, not just the "victoms" side.(paraphrase) Then make an informed decision.

As to the alcohol and cigarettes, yes I would if they were illegal. You can't substitute illegal with legal and call it a stance. If killing weren't illegal this case wouldn't be an issue.(see how ridiculous that is?) I don't drink or smoke, I don't care for it. Growing up with an alcholic father I know what abuses can take place around alcohol abuse.
DonR101395 is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 03:09 PM   #42
johnbt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 6, 1999
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
Posts: 6,004
"Officers conducted the raid after finding marijuana seeds in the Noels' garbage can."

I found this with google.

Well, duh, they obviously weren't growing the stuff, now were they?

Don't you wish you'd been a fly of the wall at the planning meeting prior to the raid? "Okay, now let's be careful on this one and not shoot the Sunday School teacher? Hey, you in the back row, pay attention."

John
johnbt is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 09:14 PM   #43
alan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 7, 1999
Posts: 3,745
As I said, we shall have to see how this cookie crumbles, however given that blue is not my best color, I would not care to hold my breath, waiting to see the aggreived parties get a fair shake from the judiciary, either Maryland or federal. This is notwithstanding the large possibility that the news story I posted does not tell all.

I believe that it will be that cold day in hell when SWAT activities are really curbed. Have the antics of the BATFE, as it is currently known, off point perhaps, ever been checked? Some of their actions have been egregious to say the very least.
alan is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 10:53 PM   #44
Omega blood
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 7, 2005
Posts: 161
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and 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.

AMENDMENT XIV
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.
Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
(note: section 2-5 omitted)

Quote:
At 4:30 a.m. on Jan. 21, 2005, Noel and her husband, Charles, were asleep in the master bedroom of their row house when the heavily-armed Baltimore County SWAT team stormed through her home. According to the suit, officers had found “trace amounts of drugs” in trash cans outside of the home.
Is this really probable cause or just really bad and lazy police work?
This is just me but I would think you would at least try to dig up more evidence than just digging through a trash can. Keep in mind that a trashcan will eventually end up in the street where anyone can drop something into it.
Did the LE steak out the house or follow the occupants to see how they were getting or if they were selling drugs?
How about looking for specious activity?
What did they find? Some resin from some pot?

Regarding issue with the 14th amendment looks clear to me. She was deprived of life with out the due process of law. I am sure if they did some basic police work they could have found out where she worked and arrest her there. Or if she did not work find out her routine and arrest her when she was out and about.

Another question, is the husband in jail for the drugs they were looking for? Did they even find drugs? If so which ones? How much? Did they find any evidence of criminal activity at all? How about the kids (if any)? Are they in foster care or living with relatives?

It just seems to me that Cheryl Noel died at the hands of an over powered, over zealous, lazy, heavy-handed police force.

P.S. Trace amounts of drugs can be found on American money.
Omega blood is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 11:15 PM   #45
azurefly
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 22, 2005
Posts: 1,189
Quote:
No, the family had already been secured downstairs before the officers went upstairs to find the woman alone in her room pointing a gun at them.

Joab, you know that she was "pointing a gun at them" how, exactly?

It's funny how you claim people rush to judgment to condemn the cops, and then you make "factual" statements that at this point have not been proved true or false.

You stated that the woman was pointing a gun at the police. Has that been established by an unimpeachable, irrefutable source?


Now, yes, there seem to be some rather hinkey goings-on with both sides in this case. I find plenty of reason to doubt whether the family was upstanding citizens. If it is true -- and forensic evidence demonstrates it -- that the woman was shot a third time after having already collapsed, then that should go toward a wrongful death finding. After all, if any of us shot an intruder in our homes twice, and then plugged him a third and final time once he was face-down on the floor, for example, we would not be sleeping at home for many more nights, that's for sure.

I would like to see more information about how the cops came to suspect drug activity in this home;
why "trace" evidence of drugs out where any member of the public can tamper with it is reason enough for a warrant;
why the cops could not arrest the couple outside their home in a normal manner, rather than storming a home where children were present.


-azurefly
azurefly is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 11:27 PM   #46
Epyon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 2006
Location: Awesome, Colorado
Posts: 700
To DonR101395...

Anyone who's an addict regardless of legal or illegal substance is capable of abusing those around them. As for my statement on whether or not it was legal, (this is about to go off topic a bit) it would've been irrelevant as to the legality of the substance if the person was NOT an addict and was NOT an abusive parent and used that substance in moderation, how are they abusing their children? What if the children are happy with their lives at home, and the mother and father are loving parents? So pot smoking parents are suddenly abusing their children when they smoke in moderation and don't abandon/beat their kids? At this point we don't know what the warrant was for, the "trace amount of drugs" was found AFTER the raid, still if it was a drug charge busting in like that is overkill. I've known people who do drink and smoke (both legal and illegal) but raise their kids well. Not to single out a specific group but it is known that in certain cultures consumption of cannabis is perfectly okay because it is accepted as something to help relax, enjoy, and for spiritual purposes. So what's the big deal about a substance that has been used by humans for thousands of years, and has only been outlawed in the last century or so? Sometimes the legality of certain things are questionable.


Epyon
__________________
Vote Epyon for president in 2008, if you vote for Epyon all of your wildest dreams will come true: This campaign was brought to you by Epyon; funded in part by the Pizza Party, Surprise Party, Birthday Party, and Slumber Party.
Epyon is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 11:29 PM   #47
joab
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2002
Location: Orl Fla
Posts: 3,254
Quote:
You stated that the woman was pointing a gun at the police. Has that been established by an unimpeachable, irrefutable
source?
Let's see the lawyer for the family says that she had a gun no one involved with the case has at any time denied or disputed that she was in possession of a gun at the time if the incident. Is that irrefutable an unimpeachable enough for you?
If you want split frog hairs about the definition of "pointed at" go somewhere else.

Quote:
f it is true -- and forensic evidence demonstrates it -- that the woman was shot a third time after having already collapsed, then that should go toward a wrongful death finding. After all, if any of us shot an intruder in our homes twice, and then plugged him a third and final time once he was face-down on the floor, for example, we would not be sleeping at home for many more nights, that's for sure.
Wouldn't that depend on whether the first two shots could be determined to have been instantly fatal or at least incapacitating to the point that could be no twitching and/or involuntary muscle movement
__________________
Joab the Bugman
Founding member- Lords of Pomposity
It's a Yankee Doodle thing
joab is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 11:53 PM   #48
azurefly
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 22, 2005
Posts: 1,189
Quote:
Let's see the lawyer for the family says that she had a gun no one involved with the case has at any time denied or disputed that she was in possession of a gun at the time if the incident. Is that irrefutable an unimpeachable enough for you?
Nope, considering that the article that started the thread states that the lawyer said the woman was pointing the gun at the floor, not at the cop.

Quote:
Cheryl Noel feared criminal intruders had broken into her home and grabbed a lawfully registered gun and held it pointed at the floor, the suit states.
So, Joab, since you seem to have been there when it all went down, and feel at liberty to change the story of how it proceeded, why don't you just write a letter to the DA in Baltimore and tell him that you will come in and meet with him to tell him what really happened?


-azurefly
azurefly is offline  
Old August 14, 2006, 11:56 PM   #49
azurefly
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 22, 2005
Posts: 1,189
Quote:
"If it is true -- and forensic evidence demonstrates it -- that the woman was shot a third time after having already collapsed, then that should go toward a wrongful death finding. After all, if any of us shot an intruder in our homes twice, and then plugged him a third and final time once he was face-down on the floor, for example, we would not be sleeping at home for many more nights, that's for sure."


Wouldn't that depend on whether the first two shots could be determined to have been instantly fatal or at least incapacitating to the point that could be no twitching and/or involuntary muscle movement
Gee, joab, you don't think that the entry and/or exit points for the first two shots might be somewhat different from that of the third shot, alleged to have been fired once she had collapsed to the floor?


-azurefly
azurefly is offline  
Old August 15, 2006, 01:53 PM   #50
johnbt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 6, 1999
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
Posts: 6,004
"If you want split frog hairs about the definition of "pointed at" go somewhere else."

The question is was it pointed at the floor or pointed at the policeman.
johnbt is offline  
 

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14254 seconds with 7 queries