Opem Season on Police In Indiana?

[Flubber]

Dearest Post Originator,

When my eyes first glanced upon your rather eloquently worded treatise regarding this particular subject, it did not require much time, nay, dare I say it was in fact almost instantaneous that I was able to surmise that your post- though masterfully written with such quality that it may indeed rival the quintessential prose of authors such as Dostoevsky, Baldwin or perhaps even Joyce- was quite prolix; based upon the aforementioned conclusion, I resolved that I would exercise no more of my mental faculties in the act of comprehending the text that you had written.

Sincerely, and wholly unequivocally yours,

Al B. Sure!

Post Scriptum,

In the future it would be most advantageous, not only for me but also the other members of this forum that you provide a brief summary of your text that emphasizes the more principle points of what you have composed.

LOL-- Plagarism too ??

Seriously Albie-- whats wrong with taking the most salient points from the actual court decision and being concise about things?


The court case was pretty simple and the right result was reached IMHO. 4 of 5 judges agreed on that while the 5th left things a little open as he didn't provide any alternate disposition based on his dissent.


The new law? I will have to give it a read when I have a bit more time. I don't trust articles regarding what a law says. They so often get it wrong

[Flubber]

looks like the woman called the cops and opened the door for them

pretty close

During the argument, Mary tried to call her sister but Barnes grabbed the phone from her hand and threw it against the wall. Mary called 911 from her cell phone and informed the dispatcher that Barnes was throwing things around the apartment but that he had not struck her. The 911 dispatch went out as a ―domestic violence in progress.‖
Officer Lenny Reed, the first responder, saw a man leaving an apartment with a bag and began questioning him in the parking lot. Upon identifying the man as Barnes, Reed informed him that officers were responding to a 911 call. Barnes responded that he was getting his things and leaving and that Reed was not needed. Barnes had raised his voice and yelled at Reed, prompting stares from others outside and several warnings from Reed.
Officer Jason Henry arrived on the scene and observed that Barnes was ―very agitated and was yelling.‖ Barnes ―continued to yell, loudly‖ and did not lower his voice until Reed warned that he would be arrested for disorderly conduct. Barnes retorted, ―if you lock me up for Disorderly Conduct, you‘re going to be sitting right next to me in a jail cell.‖ Mary came onto the parking lot, threw a black duffle bag in Barnes‘s direction, told him to take the rest of his stuff, and returned to the apartment. Reed and Henry followed Barnes back to the apartment. Mary entered the apartment, followed by Barnes, who then turned around and blocked the doorway. Barnes told the officers that they could not enter the apartment and denied Reed‘s requests to enter and investigate. Mary did not explicitly invite the officers in, but she told Barnes several times, ―don‘t do this‖ and ―just let them in.‖ Reed attempted to enter the apartment, and Barnes shoved him against the wall. A struggle ensued, and the officers used a choke hold and a taser to subdue and arrest Barnes. Barnes suffered an adverse reaction to the taser and was taken to the hospital.

[Berzerker]

that makes it sound less urgent, but I'd still side with the cops on that one - its reasonable for them to try and enter when the woman told Barnes to let them in.

[MRT144]

http://www.allgov.com/Top_Stories/Vi...fficers_120611

Um...wow.

The NRA actually standing up for the 4th amendment via the 2nd. About ****ing time NRA.

[Felch]

Since the apartment was Mary's -- Barnes was in the process of moving out-- Judge Flubber would have construed the above statment of fact to mean that an owner of the apartment-- Mary-- had invited them in-- thus rendering the police entry lawful and the remainder of the issue , moot. Mary HAD placed a 911 call and the officers were responding to a possible domestic violence report so if they had come there to a locked door and no answer they could have then argued exigent circumstances to kick in the door if needed.

She didn't invite them in, she was urging her husband to yield to their threats of violence. Just like if you're being robbed, and someone says, "Don't be a hero, give them your money." It doesn't mean that the robbers have a legal right to your money, it means that they're going to get it one way or the other, and submitting will be less painful in the end. If she had invited the police in, the court's decision would have been trivial.

To me the key fact in the case is that Mr. Barnes was already leaving, and doing so peacefully (although with a lot of fuss.) The police turned a non-violent situation into a violent situation by their heavy handed bull****. If the cops hadn't shown up, there would have been no problem at all.

Remember, if Mrs. Barnes had actually invited them in, if there were signs of a struggle, if she had a busted lip or a black eye, then the police would have had an excuse. None of those conditions were true. These police were committing a crime, and the fact that lawyers and judges don't care is irrelevant. When the government doesn't obey the law, no one should obey the law.

[Dr Strangelove]

Since Barnes was standing in the door and doing nothing the officer could have stood by and waited. Barnes would have to move eventually.

[Felch]

Exactly. Why are cops always trying to start a fight?

[MOBIUS]

*Points and laughs at the US once again*

[Snotty]

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...#post725279811

Wow Albert, seriously?

Self Improvement is masturbation

[Flubber]

She didn't invite them in, she was urging her husband to yield to their threats of violence..

Wow-- Do you have any source for the police "threats of violence" or this characterization?

Because having read the case there is no mention of any of this. And in an appeal case the statement of facts are THE FACTS to which the law is applied. You may not like the facts as stated by the court but they are the with which you are stuck. The dude was MOVING OUT .

Just like if you're being robbed, and someone says, "Don't be a hero, give them your money." It doesn't mean that the robbers have a legal right to your money, it means that they're going to get it one way or the other, and submitting will be less painful in the end. If she had invited the police in, the court's decision would have been trivial.
.

WOW again. First of all -- SHE called the police-- calling 911. Do you think she did that thinking they would not come? Do you think SHE perceived them as "robbers" invading her home? Is that why she called them?

To me the key fact in the case is that Mr. Barnes was already leaving, and doing so peacefully (although with a lot of fuss.) The police turned a non-violent situation into a violent situation by their heavy handed bull****. If the cops hadn't shown up, there would have been no problem at all.

.

Triple wow--- Are you trying to say that the police should not have responded to a 911 call about domestic violence ? They HAD TO respond and check things out. No choice. the call comes and they go check it out, EVERY TIME.

Where is the evidence of ANY heavy handed bull****.

All the facts are around Barnes being agitated and confrontational

Remember, if Mrs. Barnes had actually invited them in, if there were signs of a struggle, if she had a busted lip or a black eye, then the police would have had an excuse. None of those conditions were true. These police were committing a crime, and the fact that lawyers and judges don't care is irrelevant. When the government doesn't obey the law, no one should obey the law.

So you would allow a person who is clearly agitated and angry to go back into an apartment and close the door while a person who had called 911 (possibly to get some help ??) is inside saying 'let them in , let them in. So then what? Do they wait outside? Do they leave?You would REQUIRE that he actually assault her when she likely called the police in the hope that they prevent her getting hurt.

I'm sorry . . . BUt your whole post is rife with idiocy. You would have the police stand by and do nothing in the face of a 911 call. To me there's no way in hell that the police leave until either he is calm or completely left .

[Flubber]

Since Barnes was standing in the door and doing nothing the officer could have stood by and waited. Barnes would have to move eventually.

This was the only fact that troubled me-- While he stood at the door they could leave things alone. But there is no mention of the officer initiating physical contact. What the officer in that situation could not do is allow Barnes to close the door. I would expect its police 101 that you don't allow someone to close themselves in with a domestic violence 911 complainant.

IN any event I see no reason for Barnes to commit the assault

[Dr Strangelove]

So the question is, if the new legislation was concocted as an answer to this incident, at what point could Barnes have used lethal force against the cop?

[Flubber]

So the question is, if the new legislation was concocted as an answer to this incident, at what point could Barnes have used lethal force against the cop?

I don't believe the legislation was a response to the facts of this case so much as a response to the majority's broad statement that there is no right for a citizen to refuse or resist an unlawful entry. As I said earlier I thought the court have disposed of this case more simply by construing things more simply by finding either

1. That a response to a domestic violence 911 call makes for a lawful entry OR
2. That Mary's statements of let them in constituted either a request for assistance or permission to enter ( she certainly gave no indication of denying them permission) and therefore the entry was lawful.

I glanced at the legislation yesterday and can construe no way in which he could employ lethal force without consequences. These were clearly law enforcement officers in the line of duty and there is no evidence that they threatened him or used force at all until Barnes initiated the first physical contact.