United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Cops Break Into Innocent Man’s Yard, Kill His Dog, Steal His Body, Then Urinate On His Fence
Source:
Free Thought Project
URL Source: https://thefreethoughtproject.com/w ... dy-then-urinate-on-his-plants/
Published: Jun 24, 2018
Author: Jay Syrmopoulos
Post Date: 2018-06-24 10:15:23 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 12200
Comments: 116
Dos Palos, CA – Dos Palos resident George Aguaristi filed a $1 million dollar suit in Merced County after authorities came onto his property without a warrant last month and the killed his 5-year-old pitbull, Samson. The entire ordeal was captured on surveillance cameras installed on the property. Authorities have yet to explain why they came onto the 61-year-old Dos Palos resident’s property despite signs being posted on the front gate noting “No Trespassing” and “Beware of Dog.” A report in Merced Sun-Star explained: He said he woke up May 30 with a neighbor knocking on his window who said officers had been in his fenced-in yard. The 61-year-old noted he has “Beware of Dog” and “No Trespassing” signs on the front gate. Aguaristi said he went outside to feed Samson and Delilah, another pit bull, but couldn’t find the male. After finding a business card wedge in the screen door, he called the number, which was for an investigator for the Merced County District Attorney’s Office. Efforts to reach the lead investigator by phone were unsuccessful on Thursday. It was an investigator who told the homeowner that an officer had killed his dog, Aguaristi said. He’d slept through it all. “I was just in shock. My mind just went,” Aguaristi said. “Eventually, I said, ‘Is there something you needed to ask me?’ And, (the officer) says, ‘No, that’s about it.’ “ After being informed that his dog had been killed, Aguaristi reviewed footage from the surveillance cameras on his property. The footage revealed that around 8:30 a.m. a male and female officer entered the property through the front gate where the signs were posted. The female officer can be seen walking towards the porch of the residence, at which point Samson comes down the stairs and takes a stance between the front door of the home and the officer. At this point the officer appears to use pepper spray — which only serves to agitate Samson — who begins to move toward the officer. The officer can then be seen pulling a firearm and shooting/killing the dog. While likely not aware they were being recorded, the two officers can then be seen taking Samson’s dead body and an investigator can be seen washing Samson’s blood off of the driveway with a garden hose. “They killed my dog and they stole it,” Aguaristi said. The fact that these officers took the dog and attempted to wash away the blood is indicative of an attempt at covering up the truth of the incident in that these officers came onto private property, which warned to “Beware of Dog” and “No Trespassing,” and proceeded to then kill an animal that was doing what it was supposed to be doing – and where it was supposed to be! Sadly, this is not an exception to the rule, as TFTP has reported time and time again on cases of police officers shooting dogs maliciously and without regard. In fact, just the other day we reported on the case of an officer shooting at a dog in a small room resulting in a 9-year-old child being shot in the face. Samson is now buried on the property, and a neighbor’s children, who played with the dog often, have made a cross for his headstone, Aguaristi said. Aguaristi said that he doesn’t hate law enforcement, but just wants “justice for Samson.” “He was a good boy,” he said. “He didn’t deserve that.” To add insult to injury, after killing his dog, whom Aguaristi referred to as his “best friend” and “son,” the officer can be seen urinating on Aguaristi’s fence.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Would you have liked them to leave the dead bleeding rotting dog on the driveway? Im not a cop but im sure there is some kinda training that tells them to have the dog removed and wash the blood away. This is not a human and a human life was in danger. Who knows why they were in the backyard. Could have been called about a suspicious person in the yard. Not going to get me to shed a tear over a pit. City pay for another dog from the pound. Non vicious dog that way they can feed it to the other pit. ;(
Obviously they had no reason to be there in the first place. Not going to get me to shed a tear over a pit. Tell that to the neighborhood kids who lost a friend: Samson is now buried on the property, and a neighbor’s children, who played with the dog often, have made a cross for his headstone
We do not know that. Not going to get me to shed a tear over a pit. Tell that to the neighborhood kids who lost a friend: Well there you have a good reason to put the dog down. Threating dog around kids. Anyone that allows their kid or other peoples kids around pit should be arrested for child endangerment.
Yeah. That's why they left a business card.
He what?
Yeah. That's why they left a business card. Oh right - the cop did piss on the guy's fence before he left. Why were they there in the first place? Did they have a warrant? Was the homeowner arrested for any crime, or even called to the door?
At least he didn't piss on the dog. "Why were they there in the first place? Did they have a warrant? Was the homeowner arrested for any crime, or even called to the door?" Should that be public information? Think about it.
He must re-best friend a new pit bull every 15 years or so. All agitate propaganda lol
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Is that right or not?
Well, so far no one has stated a factual legitimate reason for the cops being there, and no reason why they shot the mans dog. I guess someone will say " they were cops, and with the badge, they can go anywhere they want, any time they want. They are above the law ".
Si vis pacem, para bellum Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. Never Pick A Fight With An Old Man He Will Just Shoot You He Can't Afford To Get Hurt "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." (Will Rogers) AMERICA! Designed by geniuses. Now run by idiots.
No one knows. Deckard articles are meant to enrage people and I have found most of them are bs. If you would like please get the truth and post it but it may just be a waste of time, again, to find out the his story does not match reality.
Well, I did a google search, and found an article from the local paper http://www.mercedsunstar.com/news/local/community/los-banos/article213532179.html Sounds about the same as the story posted in the OP. We still don't know why they were there. I think it odd that the card left was from the Merced County District Attorney's Office. You would think it would be from the PD. If they were there to serve a warrant, you would think there would be a subsequent arrest, or something. Maybe they were going to serve a warrant, and went to the wrong house, IDK. After killing the mans dog, when he called, they should have explained why they had been there. If the man really does sue, I guess more will come out then. Until then, I will assume they were there simply because they could. I did look at the video. The dog was wagging his tail, up until he was sprayed, and then shot. A vicious dog in attack mode does not wag its tail. I saw no justification for shooting the dog, and we still do not know why they were there. Justified, maybe you can dig up more info ??
Si vis pacem, para bellum Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. Never Pick A Fight With An Old Man He Will Just Shoot You He Can't Afford To Get Hurt "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." (Will Rogers) AMERICA! Designed by geniuses. Now run by idiots.
Well, based on my research ( post # 12 ) his story did match reality, and is not BS ! It appears you owe Deckard an apology !
Si vis pacem, para bellum Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. Never Pick A Fight With An Old Man He Will Just Shoot You He Can't Afford To Get Hurt "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." (Will Rogers) AMERICA! Designed by geniuses. Now run by idiots.
No one has yet to answer that question: why were the cops there in the first place. A dog wagging his tail is a pretty good sign that he's just being friendly.
I believe that as well ! Although some here will argue to the contrary !
Si vis pacem, para bellum Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. Never Pick A Fight With An Old Man He Will Just Shoot You He Can't Afford To Get Hurt "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." (Will Rogers) AMERICA! Designed by geniuses. Now run by idiots.
A vicious dog in attack mode does not wag its tail. Scientific data will argue and document the contrary. Perhaos the most common misinterpretation of dogs is the myth that a Source:
Right on Que ! LOL You can believe your Phd. I will stick with my life time real world experience. BTW Gatlin, can you tell us why the cops were there ?
Si vis pacem, para bellum Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. Never Pick A Fight With An Old Man He Will Just Shoot You He Can't Afford To Get Hurt "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." (Will Rogers) AMERICA! Designed by geniuses. Now run by idiots.
The cops stole the man's body? Now he is singing the skeleton song, Ain't Got Nobody.
I will stick with my life time real world experience. Of course you will … "A Closed Mind is a Wonderful Thing to Lose." Dogs use their tails to communicate strong emotions such as agitation, annoyance and anger as well as happiness.
Help! I feel like I’m a bad judge of doggy character. I love dogs and thought I had a good connection with them. Recently though, a friend’s dog bit me. I now feel a bit confused and less confident around other dogs. I still don’t understand what happened. He was wagging his tail right before biting me. Answer: Trust me. As a trainer, you are not the first person who has said, “But his tail was wagging when he bit me!” This is what trainers call the trick of the tail! Somewhere over the years, we silly humans came to believe that a tail wag is the sign of a happy dog.
The community has learned the hard lesson that police are psycho killer intruders whose badges & gang color blue, give them special privileges that place them above the law. It's up to the community as a whole to neutralize this threat by whatever means they can. Psyched up and ready to take out porch nick-nacks, garden gnomes, dogs, and anything else that frightens them.
"Front door". Front door meaning front yard meaning public access. Right there he will lose the case(in a sane world). Maybe by front door they mean backdoor??
Possibly the front door although many back doors have porches too, but it was not public access. There's a fence and signs posted, Ignorance of the law, or of the language is no excuse. Deport them!
You kill my pet,I kill you. End of story. And that dog was a pet that was doing what he was supposed to be doing,defending his master and property from invaders. If he had jumped the fence and gone after the cops or anyone else walking down the sidewalk,different story and justified shoot. The shoot was NOT justified because the cops were invading private property without just cause.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
The US Supreme Court ruled in Florida v. Jardines, 133 S.Ct. 1409 (2013) that the police have an absolute right to walk up to a front door of a person’s home since that right is subject to an implied license based on existing social norms. There is an implied license to approach a front door with the intent to knock and try to speak to the homeowner. The police can go up the front door when a homeowner puts up “no trespassing” signs or something similar. The signs do no revoke the implied license. In United States v. Denim, 2013 WL 4591469 (E.D.Tenn. August 28, 2013), the district court (adopting the magistrate judge’s R&R) held that “no trespassing signs” do not revoke the implied license and that officers can approach the front door and knock on the door despite the signs.
Howdy, Gatlin. Good to see you around!
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
It is also local law for Merced County. http://www.qcode.us/codes/mercedcounty/index.php?topic=7%20 Chapter 7.04 DOGS, CATS, AND OTHER DOMESTICATED ANIMALS 7.04.291 Right of entry for enforcement conditions. A. The director, any officer or employee thereof, or other duly designated representative of the county, and any law enforcement officer shall have the right to make an inspection to enforce the provisions of this chapter or other applicable law by entering property to enforce the provisions of this chapter or other applicable law; provided, that: 1. If such building and/or property is occupied, he shall first present proper credentials to the occupant and request entry, explaining his reasons therefor; and if such building and/or property is unoccupied, he shall first make a reasonable effort to locate the owner thereof or other persons having authority over the building and/or property and request entry, explaining his reasons therefor. 2. If such entry into the building or upon the property be refused, the director, any officer or employee thereof, or other duly designated representative of the county and any law enforcement officer may obtain an inspection warrant pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (Sections 1822.50 through 1822.57), for the entry and inspection of the building and/or the property. However, if the conditions of Code of Civil Procedure Section 1822.50 cannot be satisfied and criminal charges are implicated, animal control or the law enforcement officer may seek a search warrant of said building and/or the property. 3. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the director, any officer or employee thereof, or other duly designated representative of the county, and any law enforcement officer has reasonable cause to believe that the keeping or the maintaining of any animal is so hazardous, unsafe or dangerous as to require immediate inspection to safeguard the animal or the public health or safety, he shall have the right to immediately enter and inspect such building and/or property, and may use any reasonable means required to effect such entry and make such inspection, whether such building and/or property is occupied or unoccupied, and whether or not permission to inspect has been obtained. If the building and/or property is occupied, he shall first present proper credentials to the occupant and request entry, explaining his reasons therefor. B. This section shall not prohibit the director, any officer or employee thereof, and any law enforcement officer from entering upon any public or private property in the unincorporated territory of the county of Merced for the purpose of capturing an animal running at large in violation of this chapter or other applicable law. Any person who denies or prevents, obstructs, or attempts to deny, prevent or obstruct said capture is guilty of a misdemeanor. (Ord. 1675 § 2, 2002).
There were no animal code enforcement issues, so what you've quoted is irrelevant LEO boot licking. No value added. You've done nothing to clear up the mystery why these psycho cops trespassed on the property.
“Ignorance of law excuses no one” (ignorantia legis neminem excusat ) or if you prefer “ignorance of the law excuses not” (Ignorantia juris non excusat). This legal principle does emphatically hold that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely because one was unaware of its content. You hondo, are however foolishly displaying your cluelessness when attempting to apply this legal principle here and your statement shows complete incomprehension and total unawareness of any familiarity with the law as it applies in this situation. It matters not to the police if there’s a fence and signs posted….they had the absolute lawful right to approach the front door of the residence.
They still need to have a reason to knock on the door - they didn't. And there is no indication that they even attempted to knock on the door, even after killing the dog. Oh sure, they left a business card and pissed on the guy's fence. Yep - real "heroes".
No such credentials were presented, no entry was requested - for Pete's sake - the cop never even knocked at the door. What reason did he have for being there? B. This section shall not prohibit the director, any officer or employee thereof, and any law enforcement officer from entering upon any public or private property in the unincorporated territory of the county of Merced for the purpose of capturing an animal running at large The dog was inside the owner's yard - not running wild in the streets. None of what you posted applies in this situation.
I have seen people with fence in the front too. For some reason there really isn't any information on this subject other than this one article. Which makes it very hard to make a proper decision. IMHO
See post 22.
Correct. So can the mailman, the UPS guy, the Fedex guy, the pizza guy, or any other visitor. Which means that you can't let a pit bull roam free in that public access area.
None of your fucking business. Maybe they were investigating a child porn ring. Do you think it should be public knowledge that the police were there for that reason when the guy may be totally innocent? Just to satisfy your fucking curiosity?
Sure they did. They just didn't tell you. "And there is no indication that they even attempted to knock on the door, even after killing the dog." Well, they didn't attempt to knock because the was a loose pit bull in the way. And they figured that if the commotion and the gunfire didn't bring anyone to the door, knocking would have no effect.
The article clearly and emphatically stated: “Authorities have yet to explain why they came onto the 61-year-old Dos Palos resident’s property.” Just because the authorities have not “yet” provided a reason in absolutely no way means they had NO reason to knock on his door. Please provide a source validating your “malicious claim” that “they didn’t have reason to knock on the door?’
I have seen post 22. It means nothing. The cops could have backed off and called the owner on the phone and told him to secure his dog. It's not like there was a kidnapped child in there being tortured. There was no emergency. The ONLY reason those cops killed that dog was because they were cops,and they knew they could get away with it. I repeat,you kill my dog and my dog isn't attacking you or is attacking you with good reason,I will kill you and I don't give a damn how many badges you may be carrying. This kind of insane and out of control crap by the police needs to STOP. They are NOT our masters. They are our EMPLOYEES.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
No,the REAL message here is you can't allow cops to roam free outside of their own yards. That pit bull was in the yard where HE lived,doing what he was SUPPOSED to be doing.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Correct. So can the mailman, the UPS guy, the Fedex guy, the pizza guy, or any other visitor. WRONG. I used to be a letter carrier,and we were told to NOT go into fenced yard with "No Trespassing" signs. We were to put a notice in the mail box at the fence if we had something that wouldn't fit into the mailbox. I have never worked for UPS or any of the other delivery services,but I would be shocked if they weren't told the same thing. Like it or not,cops are NOT our Masters. They are nothing but public employees and have no special rights or powers that common citizens don't have.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
None of your fucking business. So,it is none of the public's business to know what a public employee is doing on or with their property? I guess this means all I need is a badge to go to your house and drive your car away,rape your daughter AND your dog,and then burn your house down around you?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
None of your fucking business. Really! You're a trip bobby! First of all you want no accountability for police, now you want complete secrecy. Maybe they were investigating a child porn ring. Seriously? That must have been some investigation! They didn't even bother to knock at the door. If what you said was true, they would have sent in a militarily armed SWAT team and broke down the door.
Good job summing up whitey's mindset (and Gatlin's as well).
Not complete secrecy. YOU don't need to know why they were there.
misterwhite: Correct. So can the mailman, the UPS guy, the Fedex guy, the pizza guy, or any other visitor. Sneakypete: You are correct, Pete, in that USPS, UPS, FEDEX, pizza companies and all other delivery services can establish their own procedures and restrictions for delivery and they have as you so adeptly explained in one situation here. However, misterwhite is not “WRONG.” By laws that have been validated by court rulings all the way up to SCOTUS….NO ONE can be restricted or denied access to the front door of a residence by a “No Trespassing – Private Property” sign, a fence or any other means. However, these police officers did not exercise any “special rights or powers” or even try to do so when they entered the gate and approached the front door to the residence. Like it or not….these police officers were fully permitted by law to do so, irrespective of any posted signs.
I repeat,you kill my dog and my dog isn't attacking you or is attacking you with good reason,I will kill you and I don't give a damn how many badges you may be carrying.
Lacking your psychic ability to determine the cops went there and entered the yard for no reason at all, I find insufficient information provided, typical of the FAKE NEWS site The Free Thought Project.
Lacking your psychic ability to determine the cops went there and entered the yard for no reason at all, I find insufficient information provided, typical of the FAKE NEWS site The Free Thought Project. Numbnuts supposedly slept through one or more gunshots and multiple LEOs in his yard. It is unlikiely that knocking would have awakened him unless they knocked with a battering ram.
As long as you cannot answer this question, you and the The Free Thought Project lack sufficient cause for all the blather.
Oh...so they didn't knock? Then why were they there in the first place? No one has yet answered that simple question. If they HAD been there for a reason, there would have been a lot more more going on than just the cop provoking and then killing the dog.
It is public’s business to know that any and all access to the front door of a residence cannot be restricted by a “No Trespassing – Private Property” type sign, a fence or any other means.
You do not know if they knocked, or why they were there. Until you do, the article is meaningless.
The reason is apparent in the video. The cops trespassed in order to piss on the fence and mark their gang turf.
Are you polishing your jack boots while lusting after a job with the Secret Police?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
That is absolutely correct. However, these police officers did not exercise any “special rights or powers” or even try to do so when they entered the gate and approached the front door to the residence. Like it or not….these police officers were fully permitted by law to do so, irrespective of any posted signs. Both cannot be true. For example,you can be standing out in your yard and if a cop approaches you,you can tell him to stay off your property unless he goes and gets a warrant. IF the fools in the SC ruled differently,as you claim,they not only ruled wrong,they are derelict in their obligations to protect individual freedoms.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Yes. There comes a time when you have to draw a line in the sand,and my pets are my family as much as humans are. If you think differently,you should have been born in the 1920's so you could have joined the CPUSSR or the Nazi Party,BOTH of whom grace their police with special rights and powers regular citizens didn't have.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
As long as you cannot answer this question, you and the The Free Thought Project lack sufficient cause for all the blather. Guilty until proven innocent,and they don't need to damn search warrant,huh?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
In all the years I have dealt with dogs not once would they let me "back off". You will have to run away or beat them with a stick(punch them so hard they realize this is a bad deal for them). If this was in the backyard behind a locked gate then I could see a problem. Front yard by the front door then its all on the owner. Dogs are not people. They do not understand boundaries. All they know is if you run or turn your back they attack. Its really only the pits that cause all the problems and its really only been since 2000 where manchilds want these types of dogs. Pits do not have self control and that's why so many attack their own owners and family. Bad bad breed that should not be allow in society.
Your example is an irrelevant conclusion, also known as ignoratio elenchi (Latin for an ignoring of a refutation) or missing the point. Your informal fallacy of presenting such an argument is logically valid and sound, but entirely fails to address the issue under discussion and in question. It therefore falls into the broad class of relevance fallacies. It is quite obvious that your informal fallacy arises from "ignorance of the nature of refutation." George Aguaristi was NOT standing out in his yard and therefore the officers had every legal right to enter his property and proceed towards the front door irrespective of any posted sign or fence. Like it or not….these police officers were fully permitted by law to do so, irrespective of any posted signs. Both cannot be true.
That action was LAWFUL irrespective on any posted sign and your “personal opinion.”
As long as it remains unknown why the cops were there, no claim of unlawful presence is justified. As is its daily practice, TFTP published half a story with a bunch of supermarket tabloid allegations.
The cop should have pissed on sneakypete.
Don’t ignore me Gatlin... say hello. lol
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
I used to work for the phone company. If we had to go inside someones property, and they had " No Trespassing - Beware of Dog " signs , we would call them and they would restrain the dog, or we would go on & come back the next day. Many times, the dogs were not a problem, we would pet the dogs, give them part of a sandwich, and do our work. No problem. It was pretty much the same way with the guys from the Power Co, CATV guys, gas company, and water company. I had a friend that worked for UPS, never had any problems
Si vis pacem, para bellum Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. Never Pick A Fight With An Old Man He Will Just Shoot You He Can't Afford To Get Hurt "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." (Will Rogers) AMERICA! Designed by geniuses. Now run by idiots.
Hello there, GrandIsland. I saw your earlier post and I intended to get back to it after I finished helping to straighten this thread out by joining with some other enlightened and intelligent posters to present facts for clarification. It is obvious that these successful efforts by all concerned and participating are now complete and I have time.
Well, it’s refreshing to see ya back. Keep up the good conservative fight.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Mine can be,and is. If you want to come on my property and be able to leave under your own power,bring a search warrant.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Yeah,a RATIONAL person gets a badge so he isn't responsible no matter whose rights he violates,right?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Fire Island, Gatlin, Noyo Chimp Shoot first, make up Fake News later.
Don't forget to add," tooconservattive" to the standard bullshitter file.
Yes, add tooconservative and include his pink bloomers.
Furthermore, it is extremely important to maintain due process. Law enforcement officers need to understand and acknowledge the importance of due process. Any abuse of power by law enforcement officers directly contradicts the full notion of due process, so any officers who misuse their powers do so while creating the environment where the much needed due process cannot flourish and function properly. The role of the police is to function in due process by acting as fact collectors and apprehenders. Officers must constantly make decisions on when and in what circumstances they need use their power while continually reflecting on how the use of their power may look in a court under close scrutiny by a judge and jury. The law enforcement officers continue to exercise power through discretion while radical criminologist and cop-hating citizens often falsely accuse the police of having too much discretion and misusing power. It is to be recognized by all that power and authority are tools that law enforcement officers must use judiciously and ethically. Without an ethical approach, this power may be misused….thusly creating a situation that is bad for the officer, the department, and society.
Yes, add tooconservative and include his pink bloomers.
Stop with the bravado bullshit and learn to understand the current state of the law regarding when police can legally come on your property or enter your home without a warrant. While the Fourth Amendment provides all people the right to be secure on their property, laws have been written and courts have carved out a few legal and lawful exceptions to the freedom and against the warrant requirement. The first thing you should understand is that government agents are permitted to approach your front door and routinely conduct what is called a “knock and talk” investigation. This means they simply have the right to approach the front door of your home, knock on the door of your home and speak to you or whomever answers the door. Law enforcement can even enter your home without a warrant based upon a few exceptions to the requirement for a warrant. One widely used exception to the warrant requirement is the “plain view doctrine” which means that if the police have probable cause to believe they have observed something in plain view inside your home that is contraband, then they have the absolute legal right to enter without a warrant and seize that item or those items. Another widely used exception to the warrant requirement is a search based upon probable cause when they believe the search will uncover criminal activity or contraband. There are a number of common observations by police that can lead to probable cause and entry into your home without a warrant. One is the odor of marijuana. If police smell the odor of marijuana coming from a room, that gives them probable cause to enter and search without a warrant. Then there is the exception to the warrant requirement known as “exigent circumstances”. This is really a secondary exception to probable cause in that if law enforcement has a reasonable belief that evidence may be lost or destroyed in the time it takes to get a warrant, then they can legally search for or seize the evidence without a warrant. While this typically applies if the officer already has probable cause, it however is an exception worthy of its own category. These laws on police entering your property or home without a warrant are always being tested and continually evolving. Exceptions other than those I have listed here might apply to the no warrant requirement as well. Therefore if you ever have a question on Warrantless Searches, then you should not hesitate to contact an experienced criminal defense attorney with in depth knowledge of Constitutional law and emerging issues.
Awww...does somebody need a hug? Looks as if you really missed your boyfriend.
That you consider yourself either enlightened or intelligent is hilarious.
Jealously in an emotional reaction to believing scenarios in your mind that are not true. Simply changing what you believe will change your imagination and projection which can eliminate these destructive emotional reactions. Even when you feel there is justification for absurd jealous reaction, jealousy definitely is not a beneficial way to deal with the situation and is a total worthless cause.
However, SCOTUS also decreed there definitely is an “implied license” which allows the police to walk up to your front door and knock irrespective of any No Trespass – Private Property type signs, fence or other obstructions and all stupid-ass comments you may bluster up in your aggressive and indignant way with no effect. The court ruled that it is within the implied license for the police to come talk to the homeowner and no Fourth Amendment violation occurs. SCOTUS ruled that homeowners implicitly consent to people coming to knock on the door and talk to them. If you fail to recognize that under our Constitution the Supreme Court of the United States is the final arbiter of the law and is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution….then that is your personal problem. Law enforcement can legitimately approach your residence without a warrant in order to conduct a warrantless knock-and-talk encounter. This not an intrusion subject to constitutional protections. BTW – The TFTP article you posted is yet another of many biased trash pieces.
Shoot first, make up Fake News later. Do the words "cheap shit" now define you. You might notice that *I* am a Trump supporter,you freaking dummy! But seeing as how your hatred of Trump knows no boundaries,how about name the clown you voted for instead of Trump? Or are you ashamed to mention his or her name,or maybe have a restraining order against you that keeps you from mentioning them?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Nice little tap dance you are doing to try to provide cover for the two cops that invaded that mans property for no known reason,and then killed his dog before leaving.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
HorseHillary! The cops ONLY have that "implied license" if they have reason to believe a crime has been committed or is being committed on the property,or if there is cause to believe someone there is in distress. Which those two obviously did not have because they just killed the dog and left. As for the No Trespassing signs,the SC had their heads up their asses on that one,and I fully expect them to be forced to reverse it on appeal. Cops have NO universal/under any conditions to enter a property that is posted with No Trespassing signs. If there is no emergency and they need to contact you,they can send you a letter,call you on the phone,or wait until you leave the house and yard,and approach you on the street.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Get over yourself already you self-aggrandizing clown. Your penchant for worshiping all things government is not what any sane person would call "enlightened".
Nice little tap dance you are doing to try to provide cover for the two cops that invaded that mans property for no known reason,and then killed his dog before leaving. I am no common tap dancer. If there is a necessary analogy comparison to dancing to be made, then I am a sophisticated ballroom dancer along the style of Fred Astaire. However I need no dance analogy to continue pointing out to you that while the reason for the officers visit the Dos Palos resident George Aguaristi home will be revealed, that point is irrelevant since the officers had the lawful right to approach the door for a “knock-and-talk” visit. Also, there are many court cases to show the officers violated no law when they shot the PITBULL they felt was threatening them. Ergo, there was definitely NO property invasion and shooting the PITBULL was a decision the threatened officer made lawfully. While you may continue to disagree with the SCOTUS decision, you still need to learn and understand the current state of the law is that police can legally come onto your property and go to your door without a warrant.
They never even knocked on the door you idiotic ass! They killed his dog then ran away like the cowards that they are.
Yeah sure - It's called the "I feared for my life defense" boot-licker, the one that cops always use after killing non-threatening dogs or unarmed humans. The magic words that exonerate any cop from facing repercussions for his criminal actions. The dog posed no threat until the cops provoked it with pepper spray. See, that's how these sadists operate - provoke the dog - then claim that they feared for their lives.
HorseHillary! The cops ONLY have that "implied license" if they have reason to believe a crime has been committed or is being committed on the property,or if there is cause to believe someone there is in distress. Which those two obviously did not have …
Nicely performed op all in all. The officer can then be seen pulling a firearm and shooting/killing the dog [and preserving their own persons from bodily harm]. Hmmm... There's a presumption that pepper spray was used on the "agitated" the pitbull (as though they aren't naturally "agitated" in any case.) It appears "Samson" the Antifa-Dog was the aggressor here, threatening the LEOs. He was possibly guarding a drug operation or human traffickers. 'Free Thought Project' is a PsyOp. They are obsessed with Ghetto/Antifa criminal fortresses and their denizens -- including pitbulls -- BUT ignoring the Democrats assaults on conservatives and their daily incitement of a CIVIL WAR. Nice priorities.
Police officers’ time is too valuable an asset to waste. Your spurious remark is therefore illegitimate and made by you without having nay true genuine qualities. It is a continuation of the thought process your warped irrational mins indulges in.
if he was wanted in connection with criminal activity, why the hell wouldn't they knock at the door. Why didn't they just get a SWAT team and break it down? You bootlickers drool at the thought of SWAT raids. They had no reason to be there in the first place.
Yeah sure - It's called the "I feared for my life defense" boot-licker, the one that cops always use after killing non-threatening dogs or unarmed humans. It is easy to understand that you continue the willful and selective blindness….a true hallmark of all libertarian. It’s the only way the short memory span of you libertarians can continue to hold onto your ridiculously failed and ludicrous ideology in the face of true reality. Mere conjecture and pure speculation is not good….NOT GOOD. I do see more of you expounding pure libertarian bullshit, and you continue to expose that you are just another petulant cop-hating anarchist divorced from reality with a case of arrested development. You are utterly clueless about the real world because you can’t perceive anything outside your only little self-absorbed bubble of hate.
While you may continue to disagree with the SCOTUS decision, you still need to learn and understand the current state of the law is that police can legally come onto your property and go to your door without a warrant. ---- gatlin These laws on police entering your property or home without a warrant are always being tested and continually evolving. Exceptions other than those I have listed here might apply to the no warrant requirement as well. Therefore if you ever have a question on Warrantless Searches, then you should not hesitate to contact an experienced criminal defense attorney with in depth knowledge of Constitutional law and emerging issues.----- Gatlin Indeed, laws on police entering your property or home without a warrant are always being tested and continually evolving, and with another solid conservative on the scotus, appointed by Trump, we can expect to see these warrantless infringements overturned.. Gatlin will weep..
HA!! Did Herr Gilligan really write this?? He's sounding an awful lot like...the official business end of such pointed questions and issues, isn't he?
I believe in equal justice under law…a societal ideal that has influenced the American legal system.
They had no reason to be there in the first place. Likely because the perp and LE had a history whereby the perp disrespected and dared LE. Daring LE to push the envelope is a bad bet -- even IF you're in the right. The Short Answer? Neither these kinds of outlaw perps or LE play by "The Rules". (Didn't you ever watch the excellent Tee-Bee Show, 'The Shield'?)
There is a distinctly huge difference between expectation and hope. Expectation is seen as demanding an event to exactly happen as one wants it to happen….regardless how the event is actually happening. An expectation is something that is normally inflexible and rigid….completely unable to give or change. An expectation can easily influence behavior and attitude and affect how you see the world….then how you respond to it. On the other hand, hope is much different. While an expectation is the assumption that some event is actually going to happen….hope is the wish for something to happen. Hope is not rigidly implanted as is expectation because hope is completely flexible and alive to respond to events. Hope embraces reality and gives reason to change over time. Expectation is always so intensely rigid and it is responds to negatively and even become angry…then make an attempt to control to try to force the expectation. However, when something does not live up to our hope, it is easy to keep hoping because hope is ever flexible. One can easily adjust a hope based on a learned experience. There is no such thing as a false hope while expectations can easily be unrealized. Ergo, maybe you should be filled with hope and not expectation. Just saying …
I watch the video. The dog did attack the "Officer"(look more like detectives not uniformed officers). Looks as if the second officer almost was attacked by the other dog from the backside but the discharge scared the dog away. I can not tell if that was front of back door. If it was front then you must allow people access to your house for communications. I found this property on google and its a hodge podge house in the middle of no where. There was no getting out of the yard without officers getting bitup, dog dying or both.
name the clown you voted for instead of Trump? Big whoopie doo! Go hug your Trumpy Bear. If the police blew you and your pets to smithereens for no particular reason, Trump would praise them. I voted for Darrell Castle, and he's not a clown. Neither Trump nor Hillary are worthy of a vote.
Darell Castle - ***Snicker*** From: THE LIBERTARIAN REPUBLIC. Top 10 Reasons Not to Vote for Constitution Party Candidate Darrell Castle. Darrell Castle is Not a Serious or Legitimate Choice for President - by Josh Guckert Some libertarians, upset with the nomination of Gary Johnson, as well as the choices of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, have begun pondering the possibility of voting for Constitution Party candidate Darrell Castle. He is scheduled to be on enough ballots (when including write-in eligible states) to theoretically win the election. However, deeper inspection into his record indicates a very frightening candidacy. While he is good on many issues which libertarians hold dear, on others, he and his party are as bad or worse than the Republicans and Democrats. These are the top ten reasons not to vote for the Constitution Party and Darrell Castle. Click here to read the 10 reason not to vote for Constitution Party Candidate Darrell Castle.
Do you think Donald Trump is too lenient on immigration? Perhaps in that case, Castle might be the answer. Yes, a President Darrell Castle would have deported millions of Donald's Dream Students already, and be raiding Gatlin's gated community for more, right now!
The dictionary states the word “perhaps” is “used when one does not wish to be too definite or assertive in the expression of an opinion.” Your use of the word firmly speaks to the fact that you lack trust in the man to do anything about immigration. Pathetic and sad....very SAD.
There’s only a few normal posters here. When one stops posting... of course they’re missed. lol
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Rather subjective term. Am sure not everyone would agree who all belongs in that group, LOL !!!
Si vis pacem, para bellum Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. Never Pick A Fight With An Old Man He Will Just Shoot You He Can't Afford To Get Hurt "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." (Will Rogers) AMERICA! Designed by geniuses. Now run by idiots.
Because they ran away like scared little girls after killing the dog. Ah, but YES they do. I thoroughly covered the specific conditions in my Post #77. You get wood at thinking of licking jack boots,and this interferes with your ability to reason.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
There is literally no excuse you won't make to kiss cop ass,is there?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
No,it's called a "police state" because DA are VERY reluctant to charge the cops they work with to build their conviction rates with a crime. Furthermore,judges are reluctant to deal with a cop conviction,so they find reasons to dismiss the charges. It IS a fixed system that protects itself.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
He doesn't even rise to that level.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
There is no limit to your stubborn ignorance, is there?
It is merely a derogatory conjecture by you to support your agenda.
I find no satisfaction is doing that so I will leave you with the knowledge that a SCOTUS ruling permitted the officers to have lawful access to the front door of that residence and case law justified the shooting of the PITBULL that can be seen in the video threatening the officers. There was definitely no trespass and it was absolutely a good shoot on the PITBULL kill. If you are pissed off about all of that….then learn to LIVE WITH IT….for there is nothing else you can do.
You have no evidence to show that is true. You mean other than them running away?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Yes,there is. I can and will continue to live my life according to MY standards and beliefs.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
And there are people that are shocked that trust & respect for law enforcement is at an all time low ! Story's like this, those of shooting unarmed people, and the recent revelations of the corruption of FBI & DOJ, plus corruption of " elites " fuels that lack of respect & shrinking trust. I am surprised at the number that find that lack of trust & respect shocking !!
Si vis pacem, para bellum Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. Never Pick A Fight With An Old Man He Will Just Shoot You He Can't Afford To Get Hurt "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." (Will Rogers) AMERICA! Designed by geniuses. Now run by idiots.
#2. To: Justified (#1)
Would you have liked them to leave the dead bleeding rotting dog on the driveway?
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#3. To: Deckard (#2)
Obviously they had no reason to be there in the first place.
#4. To: Deckard (#0)
The fact that these officers took the dog and attempted to wash away the blood is indicative of an attempt at covering up the truth of the incident
#5. To: Deckard (#0)
He’d slept through it all.
#6. To: misterwhite (#4)
The fact that these officers took the dog and attempted to wash away the blood is indicative of an attempt at covering up the truth of the incident
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#7. To: Deckard (#6)
Oh right - the cop did piss on the guy's fence before he left.
#8. To: Deckard (#0)
To add insult to injury, after killing his dog, whom Aguaristi referred to as his “best friend” and “son,”
#9. To: Deckard (#6)
Why were they there in the first place? Did they have a warrant?
"We live in the cursed conditions in which a human being can disappear into the void and even his closest relatives, his mother and his wife ... do not know for years what has become of him.” Is that right or not? That is what Lenin wrote in 1910 in his obituary of Babushkin."
--Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
--The Gulag Archipelago in three volumes
#10. To: Deckard (#0)
#11. To: Stoner (#10)
Well, so far no one has stated a factual legitimate reason for the cops being there, and no reason why they shot the mans dog.
#12. To: Justified (#11)
(Edited)
#13. To: Justified, Deckard (#11)
" Deckard articles are meant to enrage people and I have found most of them are bs. If you would like please get the truth and post it but it may just be a waste of time, again, to find out the his story does not match reality. "
#14. To: Stoner (#12)
The dog was wagging his tail, up until he was sprayed, and then shot. A vicious dog in attack mode does not wag its tail. I saw no justification for shooting the dog, and we still do not know why they were there.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#15. To: Deckard (#14)
" A dog wagging his tail is a pretty good sign that he's just being friendly. "
#16. To: Stoner, Justified, Deckard (#15)
(Edited)
A dog wagging his tail is a pretty good sign that he's just being friendly.
I believe that as well ! Although some here will argue to the contrary !
dog wagging its tail is happy and friendly. While some wags are indeed
associated with happiness, others can mean fear, insecurity, a social
challenge or even a warning that if you approach, you are apt to
be bitten.
What a Wagging Dog Tail Really Means: New Scientific Data
Stanley Coren PhD., DSc, FRSC
#17. To: Gatlin, Deckard (#16)
#18. To: Deckard (#0)
Cops Break Into Innocent Man’s Yard, Kill His Dog, Steal His Body, Then Urinate On His Fence
#19. To: Stoner (#17)
~ Ruth-Arlene W. Howe
A person can get bitten by a dog that's wagging his tail because he read the signs incorrectly.
And make no mistake, there is a science to tail wagging.
#20. To: Stoner (#17)
I will stick with my life time real world experience.
Get The Message: What A Dog’s Tail It’s Telling You: Question:
#21. To: Deckard, badged gangbangers, license to kill (#0)
Samson is now buried on the property, and a neighbor’s children, who played with the dog often, have made a cross for his headstone
Because, they can get away with it.
#22. To: Deckard, Stoner, Gatlin, nolu chan, VxH, GrandIsland, misterwhite, hondo68 (#0)
As the woman walks towards the porch, Samson walks down the steps and stands between the officer and the front door.
#23. To: Justified, Beware of Law Dogs (#22)
(Edited)
Front door meaning front yard meaning public access.
No Trespassing, Beware of Dog!
Maybe the officers were Somali refugees who couldn't read English?
#24. To: Justified (#1)
Im not a cop but im sure there is some kinda training that tells them to have the dog removed and wash the blood away. This is not a human and a human life was in danger. Who knows why they were in the backyard. Could have been called about a suspicious person in the yard.
#25. To: sneakypete, Justified, nolu chan (#24)
… the cops were invading private property without just cause.
The cops were NOT invading private property.
#26. To: Gatlin (#25)
#27. To: Gatlin (#25)
Title 7 ANIMALS
#28. To: nolu chan, irrelevant code cut and paste, copsucker (#27)
#29. To: hondo68, nolu chan (#28)
Hondo:
There's a fence and signs posted,
No Trespassing, Beware of Dog!
Ignorance of the law….is no excuse. Hondo:
Then here hondo, let me help you completely understand the law and fully realize why the cops were not psycho and did not trespass on the property.
You've (nolu chan) done nothing to clear up the mystery why these psycho cops trespassed on the property. The US Supreme Court ruled in Florida v. Jardines, 133 S.Ct. 1409 (2013) that the police have an absolute right to walk up to a front door of a person’s home since that right is subject to an implied license based on existing social norms. There is an implied license to approach a front door with the intent to knock and try to speak to the homeowner. The police can go up the front door when a homeowner puts up “no trespassing” signs or something similar. The signs do no revoke the implied license. Furthermore, in United States v. Denim, 2013 WL 4591469 (E.D.Tenn. August 28, 2013), the district court (adopting the magistrate judge’s R&R) held that “no trespassing signs” do not revoke the implied license and that officers can approach the front door and knock on the door despite the signs.
There …
#30. To: Gatlin, Hondo (#29)
...the police have an absolute right to walk up to a front door of a person’s home since that right is subject to an implied license based on existing social norms. There is an implied license to approach a front door with the intent to knock and try to speak to the homeowner.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#31. To: nolu chan (#27)
1. If such building and/or property is occupied, he shall first present proper credentials to the occupant and request entry, explaining his reasons therefor
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#32. To: hondo68 (#23)
Possibly the front door although many back doors have porches too, but it was not public access. There's a fence and signs posted,
#33. To: sneakypete (#24)
#34. To: Gatlin (#25)
“no trespassing signs” do not revoke the implied license and that officers can approach the front door and knock on the door despite the signs.
#35. To: Deckard (#31)
What reason did he have for being there?
#36. To: Deckard (#30)
They still need to have a reason to knock on the door - they didn't.
#37. To: Deckard (#30)
They still need to have a reason to knock on the door - they didn't.
#38. To: Justified (#33)
See post 22.
#39. To: misterwhite (#34)
Which means that you can't let a pit bull roam free in that public access area.
#40. To: misterwhite (#34)
“no trespassing signs” do not revoke the implied license and that officers can approach the front door and knock on the door despite the signs.
#41. To: misterwhite (#35)
What reason did he have for being there?
#42. To: misterwhite (#35)
(Edited)
What reason did he have for being there?
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#43. To: sneakypete (#41)
...all I need is a badge to go to your house and drive your car away,rape your daughter AND your dog,and then burn your house down around you?
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#44. To: Deckard (#42)
now you want complete secrecy.
#45. To: sneakypete, misterwhite (#40)
(Edited)
Gatlin:
“no trespassing signs” do not revoke the implied license and that officers can approach the front door and knock on the door despite the signs.
WRONG. I used to be a letter carrier,and we were told to NOT go into fenced yard with "No Trespassing" signs. We were to put a notice in the mail box at the fence if we had something that wouldn't fit into the mailbox. I have never worked for UPS or any of the other delivery services,but I would be shocked if they weren't told the same thing. Like it or not,cops are NOT our Masters. They are nothing but public employees and have no special rights or powers that common citizens don't have.
That is absolutely correct.
#46. To: sneakypete, Justified (#38)
The ONLY reason those cops killed that dog was because they were cops,and they knew they could get away with it. This kind of insane and out of control crap by the police needs to STOP.
#47. To: Deckard (#43)
Good job …
Great job of ignoring my request for you to please provide a source validating your malicious claim that they didn’t have reason to knock on the door. See Post #37.
#48. To: hondo68 (#28)
There were no animal code enforcement issues,
A. The director, any officer or employee thereof, or other duly designated representative of the county, and any law enforcement officer shall have the right to make an inspection to enforce the provisions of this chapter or other applicable law by entering property to enforce the provisions of this chapter or other applicable law....
#49. To: Deckard (#31)
None of what you posted applies in this situation.
A. The director, any officer or employee thereof, or other duly designated representative of the county, and any law enforcement officer shall have the right to make an inspection to enforce the provisions of this chapter or other applicable law by entering property to enforce the provisions of this chapter or other applicable law....
#50. To: Deckard (#31)
What reason did he have for being there?
#51. To: nolu chan (#49)
Numbnuts supposedly slept through one or more gunshots and multiple LEOs in his yard. It is unlikiely that knocking would have awakened him unless they knocked with a battering ram.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#52. To: sneakypete, misterwhite (#41)
So,it is none of the public's business to know what a public employee is doing on or with their property?
I guess this means all I need is a badge to go to your house and drive your car away,rape your daughter AND your dog,and then burn your house down around you?
No, just because you concoct the most ridiculous analogy you can think of does not make it so. You are erroneously trying to make a reasonable argument but turned it into an absurd one, by taking the argument to the extremes. Note that this is not a valid reductio ad absurdum proving that sometimes it is easy to reduce an arguments to absurdity.
#53. To: Deckard (#51)
Oh...so they didn't knock? Then why were they there in the first place?
#54. To: nolu chan, marking their turf, blueline gang hit (#48)
the cops went there and entered the yard for no reason at all
#55. To: misterwhite (#44)
Not complete secrecy. YOU don't need to know why they were there.
#56. To: Gatlin (#45)
Like it or not,cops are NOT our Masters. They are nothing but public employees and have no special rights or powers that common citizens don't have.
#57. To: Gatlin (#46)
#58. To: nolu chan (#50)
What reason did he have for being there?
#59. To: sneakypete (#38)
#60. To: sneakypete (#56)
For example,you can be standing out in your yard and if a cop approaches you,you can tell him to stay off your property unless he goes and gets a warrant.
IF the fools in the SC ruled differently,as you claim,they not only ruled wrong,they are derelict in their obligations to protect individual freedoms.
There is no “IF” and I made NO claim. I linked directly to the SCOTUS ruling for you to read. You are entitled to your personal opinion but you stating they ruled wrong and that they are derelict in the obligations to protect individual freedoms in NO way NEGATES the law. You can of course choose to ignore the law and pay the consequences, if the case arises, but you cannot invalidate the law. However, these police officers did not exercise any “special rights or powers” or even try to do so when they entered the gate and approached the front door to the residence.
Yes, both can be and are definitely proven to be true by the cited case law.
#61. To: sneakypete, nolu chan (#58)
Guilty until proven innocent …
Exactly WHERE is any “guilt” until proven “innocent?” … and they don't need to damn search warrant,huh?
The officers did NOT need a “damn search” warrant to open the gate and proceed towards the front door.
#62. To: sneakypete (#57)
Yes. There comes a time when you have to draw a line in the sand,and my pets are my family as much as humans are.
If, or when, you shoot and kill a police officer who shot and killed your dog….you are not “drawing a line in the sand” because you are in actuality digging your own grave. If you think differently …
I do think differently think differently. I simply do not believe that the police killing your dog is JUSTIFICATION for you killing the policeman. I am of the opinion that such a thought process is neither rational nor is it endowed with reason or understanding and therefore lacks usual or normal mental clarity or coherence. … joined the Nazi Party.
Ah, you are now stooping so low to invoke Godwin's law (or Godwin's rule of Hitler analogies)….the internet adage asserting that "as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches. That is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will feel the need to compare someone else or something to Adolf Hitler or his deeds.
#63. To: sneakypete (#58)
Guilty until proven innocent,and they don't need to damn search warrant,huh?
#64. To: Gatlin (#52)
#65. To: misterwhite (#64)
(Edited)
To your point, it has once again been demonstrated that a completely irrational thought process is without a doubt one of the most difficult human behaviors to understand and completely impossible to deal with logically. An irrational person doesn’t listen or respond to reason, logic, or even basic common sense because they are to laser focused to fulfill the absence of some personal need. It is impossible to use logic or facts to convince an irrational person of the wrongness of their points of view.
#66. To: Gatlin (#65)
#67. To: sneakypete (#40)
" I used to be a letter carrier,and we were told to NOT go into fenced yard with "No Trespassing" signs. We were to put a notice in the mail box at the fence if we had something that wouldn't fit into the mailbox. "
#68. To: GrandIsland (#66)
Don’t ignore me Gatlin... say hello.
#69. To: Gatlin (#68)
#70. To: Gatlin (#52)
It is public’s business to know that any and all access to the front door of a residence cannot be restricted by a “No Trespassing – Private Property” type sign, a fence or any other means.
#71. To: Gatlin (#65)
To your point, it has once again been demonstrated that a completely irrational thought process is without a doubt one of the most difficult human behaviors to understand and completely impossible to deal with logically. An irrational person doesn’t listen or respond to reason, logic, or even basic common sense because they are to laser focused to fulfill the absence of some personal need. It is impossible to use logic or facts to convince an irrational person of the wrongness of their points of view.
#72. To: Gatlin, Stradivarius Ignoramus, LF Harpies, *Arab Spring Jihad* (#29)
#73. To: hondo68, Fire Island, Gatlin, Noyo Chimp, tooconservattive (#72)
#74. To: hondo68 (#72)
#75. To: sneakypete (#71)
Yeah,a RATIONAL person gets a badge so he isn't responsible no matter whose rights he violates,right?
Rational law enforcement officers fully realize and are completely appreciative of the enormous amounts of power they posses which can be used under legally permitted specific circumstances to restrict the freedom of citizens, search them and their homes, seize property and use force against them when necessary. While Law enforcement officers do rank among the most powerful occupations in our society, they are however trained to know when these powers can be legally applied. It is imperative that law enforcement officers remember not to misuse their power.
#76. To: Fred Mertz, 2kon (#74)
(Edited)
#77. To: sneakypete (#70)
(Edited)
If (law enforcement) wants to come on my property and be able to leave under (their) own power,bring a search warrant.
#78. To: GrandIsland, Gatslime (#66)
Don’t ignore me Gatlin... say hello.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#79. To: Gatlin (#68)
...enlightened and intelligent posters...
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#80. To: Deckard (#78)
Overcoming your intense jealousy is similar to changing any emotional reaction or behavior. You can begin to do so with awareness. Awareness allows you to see that the projected stories in your mind are fabricated. When you have established this clarity then you no longer react to the scenarios that your mind conjures up.
#81. To: Deckard (#79)
While you have consistently demonstrated that you are not, it is evident by my postings that I am a profoundly enlightened and intelligent person to such a high degree whereby I am able to thoroughly comprehend that in the Florida v. Jardines (2013) decision, SCOTUS held that the front porch of your residence is indeed a Fourth Amendment protected area.
#82. To: hondo68 (#72)
(Edited)
Fire Island, Gatlin, Noyo Chimp
#83. To: Gatlin (#77)
Stop with the bravado bullshit and learn to understand the current state of the law regarding when police can legally come on your property or enter your home without a warrant.
#84. To: Gatlin (#81)
The court ruled that it is within the implied license for the police to come talk to the homeowner and no Fourth Amendment violation occurs.
#85. To: Gatlin (#81)
I am a profoundly enlightened and intelligent person...
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#86. To: sneakypete (#83)
Stop with the bravado bullshit and learn to understand the current state of the law regarding when police can legally come on your property or enter your home without a warrant.
#87. To: Gatlin (#86)
the officers had the lawful right to approach the door for a “knock-and-talk” visit.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#88. To: Gatlin (#86)
Also, there are many court cases to show the officers violated no law when they shot the PITBULL they felt was threatening them.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#89. To: sneakypete (#84)
The court ruled that it is within the implied license for the police to come talk to the homeowner and no Fourth Amendment violation occurs.
How do you know the police officers did not have “have reason to believe a crime has been committed or is being committed on the property or if there is cause to believe someone there is in distress?” You don’t and therefore your comment specific to his incident is immaterial and not relevant. Your comment is truly PURE “HorseHillary.” As for the No Trespassing signs,the SC had their heads up their asses on that one,and I fully expect them to be forced to reverse it on appeal.
You are of course entitled to your personal opinion and your belief that the ruling may may be reversed. But until the time that may occur…. the decision eemains the Law of the Land and there is absolutely nothing you can do about that. Cops have NO universal/under any conditions to enter a property that is posted with No Trespassing signs.
Ah, but YES they do. I thoroughly covered the specific conditions in my Post #77.
#90. To: GrandIsland, Tooconservative (#0)
(Edited)
...The officer appears to use pepper spray — which only serves to agitate Samson — who begins to move toward the officer.
#91. To: Deckard (#87)
They never even knocked on the door …
If shooting the dog at the front door did not cause George Aguaristi to come to the front door and open it, then what makes you think that knocking on the door would not have been a waste of time? They killed his dog then ran away like the cowards that they are.
They killed the dog but you have no evidence that the officers “ran away like cowards.”
#92. To: Gatlin (#91)
If shooting the dog at the front door did not cause George Aguaristi to come to the front door and open it, then what makes you think that knocking on the door would not have been a waste of time?
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#93. To: Deckard (#88)
Also, there are many court cases to show the officers violated no law when they shot the PITBULL they felt was threatening them.
No its called American Jurisprudence where a jury of peers decide each case on its facts. The dog posed no threat until the cops provoked it with pepper spray.
You do NOT know that the PITBULL posed no threat or that it was provoked by the pepper spray. See, that's how these sadists operate - provoke the dog - then claim that they feared for their lives.
No I don’t see any of that.
#94. To: Gatlin, Y'ALL, --- on the wrong side of a constitutional fence once again... (#86)
#95. To: tpaine, Gilligan (#94)
Therefore if you ever have a question on Warrantless Searches, then you should not hesitate to contact an experienced criminal defense attorney with in depth knowledge of Constitutional law and emerging issues.----- Gatlin
#96. To: Deckard (#92)
if he was wanted in connection with criminal activity …
There is absolutely no reason at this point to believe that he was “wanted in connection with criminal activity.” There is no way of knowing it was not a “civil matter” and that the officers only wanted to “knock-and-talk” to him about….is there? … why the hell wouldn't they knock at the door.
Uh….the PITUBLL blocked their path to the door. Why didn't they just get a SWAT team and break it down?
They obviously felt this was not an exceptional situations that required intense firepower or specialized tactics. You bootlickers drool at the thought of SWAT raids.
Nah … They had no reason to be there in the first place.
PROVE that !!!
#97. To: Deckard, sneakypete, GrandIsland (#92)
Why didn't they just get a SWAT team and break it [the door] down?
#98. To: tpaine (#94)
Indeed, laws on police entering your property or home without a warrant are always being tested and continually evolving, and with another solid conservative on the scotus, appointed by Trump, we can expect to see these warrantless infringements overturned..
Expect….EXPECT?
#99. To: all (#0)
#100. To: sneakypete, FOP (#82)
*I* am a Trump supporter
#101. To: hondo68, sneakypete (#100)
I voted for Darrell Castle, and he's not a clown.
#102. To: Gatlin, Amnesty Don, DACA, Reconquista Republicans, Taters gated sanctuary, *Border Invasion* (#101)
Click here to read the 10 reason not to vote for Constitution Party Candidate Darrell Castle.
1. Immigration 
#103. To: hondo68 (#102)
Perhaps in that case, Castle might be the answer.
I don’t deal with anything pertaining to a “perhaps” since the word is only “used to express uncertainty or a vague possibility.”
#104. To: Deckard (#78)
Looks as if you really missed
#105. To: GrandIsland (#104)
" There’s only a few normal posters here. "
#106. To: Gatlin (#89)
How do you know the police officers did not have “have reason to believe a crime has been committed or is being committed on the property or if there is cause to believe someone there is in distress?”
#107. To: Gatlin (#91)
If shooting the dog at the front door did not cause George Aguaristi to come to the front door and open it, then what makes you think that knocking on the door would not have been a waste of time?
#108. To: Gatlin (#93)
No its called American Jurisprudence where a jury of peers decide each case on its facts.
#109. To: hondo68 (#100)
I voted for Darrell Castle, and he's not a clown.
#110. To: sneakypete (#107)
#111. To: sneakypete (#106)
Because they ran away like scared little girls after killing the dog.
You have no evidence to show that is true.
#112. To: sneakypete (#106)
You get wood at thinking of licking jack boots,and this interferes with your ability to reason.
Nah, I get great satisfaction for showing that you are a cop-hating biased idiot.
#113. To: sneakypete (#112)
It is obvious this discussion has run its course and all we are doing now is resorting to exchanging personal insults.
#114. To: Gatlin (#111)
Because they ran away like scared little girls after killing the dog.
#115. To: Gatlin (#113)
If you are pissed off about all of that….then learn to LIVE WITH IT….for there is nothing else you can do.
#116. To: sneakypete (#108)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]