what not to do when a friend is arrested

[Universe Prince]

I may have mentioned this case before. Derrick Foster was in a friend's house, partaking of some gambling, when police busted into the place. Foster claims he heard no announcement that police were at the door, only a boom. His conclusion, and that of his pals, was that someone was trying to break in to rob the place. Foster was carrying a firearm, and had a permit for it. Understandably, he reached for the weapon. Police say they did not fire. Foster says he fired back after hearing a shot. Two police officers were wounded. Needless to say, Foster is in jail. Foster has, prior to this, no criminal record and was a code inspector (he resigned after being arrested) for the city of Columbus, Ohio.

Foster also apparently has some friends willing to speak up in support of his character. Unfortunately for his friends, the police did not appreciate the letters on his behalf.

At least 14 people, including former Ohio State University athletes who knew him as a Buckeye football player, have written letters of support for Foster, who is charged with four counts of felonious assault of a police officer. Weiner cited the letters in seeking Foster's release on house arrest during a hearing on May 22. Franklin County Common Pleas Judge David E. Cain denied that request. The Fraternal Order of Police passed on many of the supporters' letters to its 4,100 members and encouraged them to express their displeasure or boycott their businesses. [...] The first two union targets were Michael McGuire, the owner of a Budget car-rental location and a lifelong friend of Foster's; and Pickerington Central High School Principal Scott Reeves, who met Foster at OSU in the mid-1980s. McGuire said he felt threatened when one officer called him and the union sent him an e-mail after he wrote that Foster "is a tremendous role model to his children and other teens in the community." [...] Despite the reprimand, the police union intends to have representatives at the next school board meeting to display their frustration with Reeves, Gilbert said.

The Columbus Dispatch

Since these people who spoke on Foster's behalf are obviously the people the defense lawyer would call on to speak about Foster's character in court, this looks to me a lot like police intimidation. But I guess it can't be called that because the police are not techinically the ones doing this. It's the police union.

"I still believe he's a threat to society. The minute you put your thoughts on a letterhead, you open yourself and your business up to criticism," said Jim Gilbert, president of Capital City Lodge No. 9. "We're asking our officers and the public to stand up between the citizens and the violence they put against our officers."

They're just defending the police. Who could be against that, right?

[Lanya]

That's dirty as hell.

[Universe Prince]

And hell is pretty dirty, so I hear.

[Rich]

So what's the police's side of the story?

[Universe Prince]

The police side of the story, as best I can determine, is that they had a warrant to look for drugs in a suspected crack house, the police announced themselves twice, and busted in the door, at which point Foster opened fire (he shot twice). No one has been charged with drug related crimes. Foster says he heard a gun shot and fired back. Police say none of the officers fired their weapons until fired upon, at which point they fired into the house but hit no one. They are basically treating Foster as a violent criminal.

[sirs]

I'm gonna have to give the benefit of the doubt to the Police officers on this one, until there's incontributable evidence that the police barged in unannounced (a tactic they rarely do), and fired their weapons 1st (which they are trained not to do, especially those that are entering a high risk enviroment, unless they see a firearm or other deadly weapon pointed at them upon entering, which again, I have no problem with

[Amianthus]

I'm gonna have to give the benefit of the doubt to the Police officers on this one, until there's incontributable evidence that the police barged in unannounced (a tactic they rarely do),

Actually, it's becoming quite common for police to use "no knock" tactics on all drug raids - to prevent the drugs from being destroyed. So, unfortunately, I have to give credence to Foster's account.

What's truly unfortunate is the police union's actions in retaliation.

[kimba1]

no matter what
those officer`s and friends of officers got no reason to mess with the businesses and people.
they can publicly defend the arrest
but this


I still believe he's a threat to society. The minute you put your thoughts on a letterhead, you open yourself and your business up to criticism," said Jim Gilbert, president of Capital City Lodge No. 9. "We're asking our officers and the public to stand up between the citizens and the violence they put against our officers."

meaning people have no right to support anyone they THINK is innocent.
personally I got no idea what really happen.
but It looks like the boy did wrong accidentally shooting those officers.
and should still pay for it
but it doesn`t mean those cops should be messing with the character witnesses.
if anything this should be evidence of police corruption.
how on earth is this kind of thinking acceptable.
looks to me they are hidding something.

[sirs]

What's truly unfortunate is the police union's actions in retaliation.

That I can wholeheartedly concur with.  But to you prior point ami, I've heard that such raids have a simultaneous "Police!!" with the knocking down of the door.  I don't have a problem with that either.   But you've heard that they don't even announce police?

[Universe Prince]

I'm gonna have to give the benefit of the doubt to the Police officers on this one, until there's incontributable evidence that the police barged in unannounced (a tactic they rarely do), and fired their weapons 1st (which they are trained not to do, especially those that are entering a high risk enviroment, unless they see a firearm or other deadly weapon pointed at them upon entering, which again, I have no problem with

Reportedly there is witness who claimed the police did not announce themselves before entering, but did give an order for windows to be broken. And they were not entering a high risk environment. Most house raids are far from high risk environments. The goal is to rush in and disorient potential suspects before they can dispose of evidence and to give the police the opportunity to assert complete authority. I know police officers are supposed to announce themselves, but I keep reading story after story where people inside the houses are claiming not to have heard, and I don't mean hardened criminals looking for an escape. I mean ordinary people who hear only a loud bang and their first impulse is self-defense or defense of their families. And sometimes the police are not even at the right house. Loud bangs and people breaking into the house frightens people, but we're supposed to believe the person acting in self-defense is a dangerous criminal who wanted to shoot a cop? I'm not buying it.

[Michael Tee]

Does anybody think the problem is the law that allows guys like Foster to carry handguns?  It's lucky that he didn't kill the two cops.  I've never heard of a drug raid where the cops DON'T yell "Police!" when they bust in - - what's the big secret?  You think the cops WANT to get shot?

Now as far as police intimidation of witnesses goes, that is just a crime, it's obstruction of justice and it doesn't matter who does it, the cops, their union or their mommas.  How the hell anyone can get away with an obvious attempt to dissuade a witness from giving evidence in court, even if it's evidence in support of a serial killer, is beyond me.  What kind of law enforcement do they have in Ohio anyway?  That's one giant step towards a police state, IMHO.  It's gotta be squelched right at the start, firmly and decisively, in a way that no cop will even THINK of it in the future.

[Universe Prince]

Does anybody think the problem is the law that allows guys like Foster to carry handguns?

Do I think the problem is the law allows people to have weapons for self-defense? No. I think the problem is the cops are increasingly using SWAT team like tactics without valid justification.

[Michael Tee]

<<I think the problem is the cops are increasingly using SWAT team like tactics without valid justification.>>

Be that as it may, a real tragedy was avoided only by blind chance or poor marksmanship here. Cops might need some reining in, but even overenthusiastic cops, who might deserve some lesser sanction or penalty, do not deserve a death penalty.  Which is exactly what they are going to get sooner or later if handgun possession by citizens is not abolished.

[Universe Prince]

Be that as it may, a real tragedy was avoided only by blind chance or poor marksmanship here. Cops might need some reining in, but even overenthusiastic cops, who might deserve some lesser sanction or penalty, do not deserve a death penalty.  Which is exactly what they are going to get sooner or later if handgun possession by citizens is not abolished.

I am guessing that by death penalty you mean getting fatally shot. Which has already happened more than once. But then, citizens do not deserve such a death penalty either, and that has happened more than once also. I have zero desire to see police get shot, but the solution to over the top police tactics resulting in people, frequently innocent citizens, being shot is not to take weapons away from the citizens. That's sort of like saying the way to keep the fox from being injured is to take the talons off the chickens.

[Plane]

Comment: Since Justice Scalia and his cohorts on the U.S. Supreme Court decided last Term in Hudson v. Michigan that the exclusionary rule no longer applies to knock-and-announce, the police no longer have any incentive to comply with the law, although the Court said that there were other purported protections of citizens besides the exclusionary rule. (Mrs. Johnston and her family would differ.) And, if the police no longer have an incentive to comply with the law, it is only natural that innocent deaths will happen, both of officers and civilians. I wrote the brief in the knock-and-announce case of Wilson v. Arkansas and I wrote most of the brief in Richards v. Wisconsin. The government always talks about the need to not announce to protect officers from injury or death at the hands of criminals, but they never wrote in any brief that they were the slightest bit concerned with potential deaths of civilians or of police at the hands of innocent civilians.

http://fourthamendment.com/blog/index.php?blog=1&title=swat_team_in_atlanta_kills_92_year_old_w&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

a northwest Atlanta neighborhood roiled over news that police had stormed a house and shot a 92-year-old woman,