Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 06 May 2024 19:42:33 +0000
From: BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: 5th Circuit police couldn't have known to check address before raid
References: <v1aos9$2jt8a$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
Date: Mon, 06 May 2024 12:51:20 -0700
Message-ID: <atropos-FF5B22.12512006052024@news.giganews.com>
Lines: 43
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-XJVm4rCq1M81IPkQYDcJArMSFgQ1nBNf5+BW+oZh9bWJvCOBc4X7SyVXOPcAAtdgnXenhIZOS1C9/if!/oK7iQC+eWBs2A4ZayFbsO3u9XpLNIpRYMuWXQDnThWGk7OZzAAuUVekFZihjxhbrgjsGItEmBtp!/fE=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 3077

In article <v1aos9$2jt8a$1@dont-email.me>,
 "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> Steve Lehto video
> 
> In a bad SWAT raid in 2019 at the wrong location, the 5th Circuit ruled
> that the SWAT team commander couldn't have known he had the correct house
> before ordering a raid on the wrong house.
> 
> Seriously? Some of us learned how to read an address as very young
> children.
> 
> Three-judge panel ruled that there was a 4th Amendment violation but
> the SWAT commander is still immune. There's even a case called Maryland
> v. Garrison in which the Supreme Court ruled that police must make a
> reasonable effort to determine that they are at the right location
> before exercising the warrant but that case didn't make it absolutely
> clear that it applied to the facts of this case.
> 
> Huh?

Now that SCOTUS has shit-canned Roe, maybe they can do the same to 
qualified immunity. It's the most ridiculous legal concept imaginable: 
"You have a constitutional right to X. We agree the cops violated that 
right. But since that right has never been violated in this exact same 
way before, you have no remedy for the violation of your right."

"Yes, the 4th Amendment guarantees that you're free from warrantless 
searches, which was violated in this case. Yes, police have violated the 
4th Amendment in the past by searching homes without warrants but the 
cop in your case was named Malcolm and we were unable to find a past 
case of another cop named Malcolm violating the 4th Amendment so there 
was no reason this cop should have known that cops named Malcolm 
shouldn't search people's homes without a warrant.

And even if he did know that Malcolm-named cops were bound by the 4th 
Amendment the same as everyone else, he searched your house during a 
full moon with both Jupiter and Venus also prominent in the sky. There 
has been no past case where all three were visible during a violation of 
the 4th Amendment, so he couldn't possibly have know the 4th Amendment 
applied under those circumstances.

So sorry. Case dismissed."