User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 4:56:10 AM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Anyone else find it "odd" that the meth found in the home wasn't mentioned in the original article? Gr Nope. The media never gets it right. They never even ask the right questions. Im my state each business they entered to use the stolen credit cards would be an additional count of commercial burglary. so hopefully their shopping spree will result in some prison time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 4:57:07 AM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Anyone else find it "odd" that the meth found in the home wasn't mentioned in the original article? Gr And that is a real risk to this prosecution arising from covering the internal cameras after the site was secure -- practically begs the defense attorney to seek reasonable doubt on the theory that stuff could have been planted there once the cameras were covered |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 7:51:31 AM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And that is a real risk to this prosecution arising from covering the internal cameras after the site was secure -- practically begs the defense attorney to seek reasonable doubt on the theory that stuff could have been planted there once the cameras were covered "Those arnt my pants." |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 8:26:18 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wait, you're county deputies arrest innocent people?  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You guys beginning to get a picture of what Minnesota cops are like? I don't know... I am good friends with several county deputies and they are nothing like what is being posted in this thread. Wait, you're county deputies arrest innocent people? It happens in Texas. http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/Man-Charged-With-Killing-Burleson-County-Deputy-No-Billed-by-Grand-Jury-243993261.html Edit to add: Thankfully the one we are discussing did not go down like this one in TX. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 9:04:45 AM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Those arnt my pants." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
And that is a real risk to this prosecution arising from covering the internal cameras after the site was secure -- practically begs the defense attorney to seek reasonable doubt on the theory that stuff could have been planted there once the cameras were covered "Those arnt my pants." Yep. Laughable, bullshit, and usually make the jurors roll their eyes. But if the premises were secure and you have officers THEN covering up the camera at times prior to the times they inventoried the various contraband, that can the thrown out there as reasonable doubt. Maybe that department should write down a few policies or something about these things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 10:40:11 AM EST
[#6]
will destroy cameras, to take away tactical advantage from the suspect(s). The suspect's can submit for reimbursement for any damaged property. Even in the article it states that the son was armed at the time. Maybe not the best decision for full blown swat but different departments have different requirements. The department may also not have anyone else that has the training to serve warrants and doing lots of entries. Serving of warrants is a very fluid operation that requires extensive training and rehearsal. Mistakes tend to happen more when you put a stack of officers together that don't routinely serve warrants or work together. (Look at the BART warrant service a couple weeks ago where there was a blue on blue shooting). These people are still suspects in a felony, just cause they didn't have the stolen property in their possession at the time doesn't mean they didn't do it or already get rid of it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 11:32:30 AM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1. In Florida: "933.17 Exceeding authority in executing search warrant; penalty.—Any officer who in executing a search warrant willfully exceeds his or her authority or exercises it with unnecessary severity, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree. . . ." What has been determined to exceed authority or unnecessary severity in the past? Seems kind of wide open when a warrant allows officers to make forcible entry. 2. Conduct reflecting poorly on the department and on his own honesty and trustworthiness. What was he hiding? Going a little tin foily......... Couldn't video cameras be sending pics to another location that would end up being searched based on evidence found? 3. I got nothin'. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 11:47:11 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This place will sour your view of LE in a hurry. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If some of these comments are from real LEO's then DAMN, no wonder people think you guys are black jack booted thugs!!  This place will sour your view of LE in a hurry. Feel free to participate in a "Citizens Academy" or become a police officer so you can see first hand how the system actually works - and possibly change things you think are wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 11:49:36 AM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1) Because innocence and guilt aren't yours to determine. 2) Because it's your job to follow orders. Did you really just say that? What orders is an investigating officer following? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 11:59:31 AM EST
[#10]
Well, I guess I need to put up a bait camera in addition to the real camera.
Fuck, I said that out loud...better add a bait camera for the bait camera. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 12:20:29 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Did you really just say that? What orders is an investigating officer following? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 1) Because innocence and guilt aren't yours to determine. 2) Because it's your job to follow orders. Did you really just say that? What orders is an investigating officer following? What do you think Law Enforcement is? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 12:38:47 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
1. In Florida: "933.17 Exceeding authority in executing search warrant; penalty.—Any officer who in executing a search warrant willfully exceeds his or her authority or exercises it with unnecessary severity, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree. . . ." What has been determined to exceed authority or unnecessary severity in the past? Seems kind of wide open when a warrant allows officers to make forcible entry. 2. Conduct reflecting poorly on the department and on his own honesty and trustworthiness. What was he hiding? Going a little tin foily......... Couldn't video cameras be sending pics to another location that would end up being searched based on evidence found? 3. I got nothin'. Yes they can. Many Video Management Systems are specifically designed to support multiple sites, with video feeds coming from each one. If they're serving search warrants at multiple sites, the possibility of another site getting tipped off by the cameras is a very real possibility. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 12:54:22 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What do you think Law Enforcement is? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1) Because innocence and guilt aren't yours to determine. 2) Because it's your job to follow orders. Did you really just say that? What orders is an investigating officer following? What do you think Law Enforcement is? I don't think "just following orders" is an acceptable answer - and I can't recall every being ordered to manufacture PC or evidence to support an arrest. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 3:43:12 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes they can. Many Video Management Systems are specifically designed to support multiple sites, with video feeds coming from each one. If they're serving search warrants at multiple sites, the possibility of another site getting tipped off by the cameras is a very real possibility. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. In Florida: "933.17 Exceeding authority in executing search warrant; penalty.—Any officer who in executing a search warrant willfully exceeds his or her authority or exercises it with unnecessary severity, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree. . . ." What has been determined to exceed authority or unnecessary severity in the past? Seems kind of wide open when a warrant allows officers to make forcible entry. 2. Conduct reflecting poorly on the department and on his own honesty and trustworthiness. What was he hiding? Going a little tin foily......... Couldn't video cameras be sending pics to another location that would end up being searched based on evidence found? 3. I got nothin'. Yes they can. Many Video Management Systems are specifically designed to support multiple sites, with video feeds coming from each one. If they're serving search warrants at multiple sites, the possibility of another site getting tipped off by the cameras is a very real possibility. And that would have happened long before the cameras were damaged/obscured. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2014 3:52:19 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And that would have happened long before the cameras were damaged/obscured. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. In Florida: "933.17 Exceeding authority in executing search warrant; penalty.—Any officer who in executing a search warrant willfully exceeds his or her authority or exercises it with unnecessary severity, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree. . . ." What has been determined to exceed authority or unnecessary severity in the past? Seems kind of wide open when a warrant allows officers to make forcible entry. 2. Conduct reflecting poorly on the department and on his own honesty and trustworthiness. What was he hiding? Going a little tin foily......... Couldn't video cameras be sending pics to another location that would end up being searched based on evidence found? 3. I got nothin'. Yes they can. Many Video Management Systems are specifically designed to support multiple sites, with video feeds coming from each one. If they're serving search warrants at multiple sites, the possibility of another site getting tipped off by the cameras is a very real possibility. And that would have happened long before the cameras were damaged/obscured. Depends on when the other site had somebody watching, and that operator happened to be looking at the screen... or whether they had alarm triggers based on doors/PIRs/panic-button... or whether the email the system triggered had arrived at the other site, and caused them to look at the video feeds. Lots of variables. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 9:35:01 AM EST
[#16]
FRAUD RAID: Victim Is Former Ankeny Officer Here’s what the chief did not say in the press conference – the victim of the credit card theft is a former Ankeny police officer who now teaches at the Iowa law enforcement academy. Curtis Pote, who worked as an officer with the Ankeny police department for 12-years, called his former colleagues when his wife’s wallet was stolen. Pote, who didn’t want to go on camera, says he does not believe his case was given any special treatment because he is a former Ankeny officer. In another development in this story, Justin Ross, the disabled veteran who lived in the home, has been charged with possession of narcotics with the intent to deliver. Ross’s attorney, who did not want to go on camera, says any drugs found in the home were not his clients, and questions why police did not arrest Ross immediately when the drugs were found. More: http://whotv.com/2014/02/06/fraud-raid-victim-is-former-ankeny-police-officer/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 9:45:47 AM EST
[#17]
That explains a lot. I'm sure the LEOs on this forum will still justify the raid though.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 9:51:27 AM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That explains a lot. I'm sure the LEOs on this forum will still justify the raid though. Doesn't look good. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 10:18:25 AM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, no shit...what the fuck is that? No honor or integrity, that's why. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have a an ATF raid on DVD. They notice they are using filmed sand shut the cameras off. It's never been seen before outside of a few select people. Really hard to make up a case afterwards when there's video. Yeah, no shit...what the fuck is that? No honor or integrity, that's why. It's obvious that the cops knew that they were in the wrong - Why else would they destroy the cameras? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 10:20:52 AM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FRAUD RAID: Victim Is Former Ankeny Officer Here’s what the chief did not say in the press conference – the victim of the credit card theft is a former Ankeny police officer who now teaches at the Iowa law enforcement academy. Curtis Pote, who worked as an officer with the Ankeny police department for 12-years, called his former colleagues when his wife’s wallet was stolen. Pote, who didn’t want to go on camera, says he does not believe his case was given any special treatment because he is a former Ankeny officer. In another development in this story, Justin Ross, the disabled veteran who lived in the home, has been charged with possession of narcotics with the intent to deliver. Ross’s attorney, who did not want to go on camera, says any drugs found in the home were not his clients, and questions why police did not arrest Ross immediately when the drugs were found. More: http://whotv.com/2014/02/06/fraud-raid-victim-is-former-ankeny-police-officer/ Did you watch the additional raid video at the end of the article? The homeowner ("disabled veteran") is full of sh*t. He wasn't "in the bathroom" when the police knocked... he was toking up in the basement with his friends, and made a run for the bathroom to hide evidence as soon as the police announced (which, by the way, is what usually happens when you hit a drug house). The reporter credulously repeating the lie of "the family says if the police had knocked, they would have opened the door and allowed the officers to search the home." Yeah. Sure looks like it, doesn't it? 
ETA: and they've made another arrest in the case... looks like they had something to do with the stolen goods after all (probably rolled on their buddy). 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 10:36:38 AM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did you watch the additional raid video at the end of the article? The homeowner ("disabled veteran") is full of sh*t. He wasn't "in the bathroom" when the police knocked... he was toking up in the basement with his friends, and made a run for the bathroom to hide evidence as soon as the police announced (which, by the way, is what usually happens when you hit a drug house). The reporter credulously repeating the lie of "the family says if the police had knocked, they would have opened the door and allowed the officers to search the home." Yeah. Sure looks like it, doesn't it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
FRAUD RAID: Victim Is Former Ankeny Officer Here’s what the chief did not say in the press conference – the victim of the credit card theft is a former Ankeny police officer who now teaches at the Iowa law enforcement academy. Curtis Pote, who worked as an officer with the Ankeny police department for 12-years, called his former colleagues when his wife’s wallet was stolen. Pote, who didn’t want to go on camera, says he does not believe his case was given any special treatment because he is a former Ankeny officer. In another development in this story, Justin Ross, the disabled veteran who lived in the home, has been charged with possession of narcotics with the intent to deliver. Ross’s attorney, who did not want to go on camera, says any drugs found in the home were not his clients, and questions why police did not arrest Ross immediately when the drugs were found. More: http://whotv.com/2014/02/06/fraud-raid-victim-is-former-ankeny-police-officer/ Did you watch the additional raid video at the end of the article? The homeowner ("disabled veteran") is full of sh*t. He wasn't "in the bathroom" when the police knocked... he was toking up in the basement with his friends, and made a run for the bathroom to hide evidence as soon as the police announced (which, by the way, is what usually happens when you hit a drug house). The reporter credulously repeating the lie of "the family says if the police had knocked, they would have opened the door and allowed the officers to search the home." Yeah. Sure looks like it, doesn't it? Oh its clear on the video that they head for the hills. This latest report is about the fact that this may indeed have been an over reaction due to that fact that it was a former Ankeny officers wife who had her wallet stolen and that officer had made a phone call to his ex partners. Edit to add: I thought it was know on day one of this thread that the police had stated that they found some of the goods purchased with the CC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 10:47:36 AM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh its clear on the video that they head for the hills. This latest report is about the fact that this may indeed have been an over reaction due to that fact that it was a former Ankeny officers wife who had her wallet stolen and that officer had made a phone call to his ex partners. Edit to add: I thought it was know on day one of this thread that the police had stated that they found some of the goods purchased with the CC. Riiiiight... and the dirtbags were just going to open up the door if the police had given them a chance. Nobody throws together a SWAT raid simply because an ex-cop's wife had her purse stolen. The defense attorney would have a friggin' field day if that was their justification for using a tac-team. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 10:50:57 AM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FRAUD RAID: Victim Is Former Ankeny Officer Here’s what the chief did not say in the press conference – the victim of the credit card theft is a former Ankeny police officer who now teaches at the Iowa law enforcement academy. Curtis Pote, who worked as an officer with the Ankeny police department for 12-years, called his former colleagues when his wife’s wallet was stolen. Pote, who didn’t want to go on camera, says he does not believe his case was given any special treatment because he is a former Ankeny officer. In another development in this story, Justin Ross, the disabled veteran who lived in the home, has been charged with possession of narcotics with the intent to deliver. Ross’s attorney, who did not want to go on camera, says any drugs found in the home were not his clients, and questions why police did not arrest Ross immediately when the drugs were found. More: http://whotv.com/2014/02/06/fraud-raid-victim-is-former-ankeny-police-officer/ Now I know why they actually did something in this CC fraud case. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:24:32 AM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Riiiiight... and the dirtbags were just going to open up the door if the police had given them a chance. Nobody throws together a SWAT raid simply because an ex-cop's wife had her purse stolen. The defense attorney would have a friggin' field day if that was their justification for using a tac-team. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Oh its clear on the video that they head for the hills. This latest report is about the fact that this may indeed have been an over reaction due to that fact that it was a former Ankeny officers wife who had her wallet stolen and that officer had made a phone call to his ex partners. Edit to add: I thought it was know on day one of this thread that the police had stated that they found some of the goods purchased with the CC. Riiiiight... and the dirtbags were just going to open up the door if the police had given them a chance. Nobody throws together a SWAT raid simply because an ex-cop's wife had her purse stolen. The defense attorney would have a friggin' field day if that was their justification for using a tac-team. Their justification for tac team was (a), gun in the house and (b) dude in the house with decade + old history of violent conduct. That was the justification for the tac team on the raid. But I think what folks are saying (and I tend to agree) is the reason this even got to the point where it was investigated as thoroughly as it was, where a warrant was sought, and where the "overkill" came from was the fact this was a fellow officer as victim case. Have you ever tried to get the police to take action on a stolen wallet or purse where a credit card was used by the theifs? Unless its tens of thousands of dollars, you get the whole "cancel your cards and talk to the hand." You don't get a big investigation and all hands on deck warrant service. This would have been on the back burner but for the fact the victim's wife was a buddy's / former officer's spouse. You know it, I know it, and when the defense attorneys subpoena all the investigation emails (if they haven't already been "accidentally" purged), the jury will know it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:24:38 AM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryCurtis Pote, who worked as an officer with the Ankeny police department for 12-years, called his former colleagues when his wife’s wallet was stolen. So? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:26:23 AM EST
[#26]
In another development in this story, Justin Ross, the disabled veteran who lived in the home, has been charged with possession of narcotics with the intent to deliver. Thats what happens when you get caught with meth in multiple packages in your house. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:27:06 AM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That explains a lot. I'm sure the LEOs on this forum will still justify the raid though. So they cops shouldt investigate if the victim is married to a former cop? What other theft victims cant get justice? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:30:27 AM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Have you ever tried to get the police to take action on a stolen wallet or purse where a credit card was used by the theifs? Unless its tens of thousands of dollars, you get the whole "cancel your cards and talk to the hand." You don't get a big investigation and all hands on deck warrant service. This would have been on the back burner but for the fact the victim's wife was a buddy's / former officer's spouse. I guess its a good thing the victim has some connections them. Because it got at least three armed tweeker drug dealing theives arrested so far. If only every theft of credit card case could go so well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:31:37 AM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So they cops shouldt investigate if the victim is married to a former cop? What other theft victims cant get justice? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That explains a lot. I'm sure the LEOs on this forum will still justify the raid though. So they cops shouldt investigate if the victim is married to a former cop? What other theft victims cant get justice? See my question above. Pretty much ALL the theft victims of a couple thousand bucks or less cannot get justice. They are told department resources, bla bla bla, we can't investigate everything, cancel your cards, didn't you have fraud protection etc. Hell, stolen items from a car stories are posted on this site all the damn time with no interest or action or follow through other than taking the report on the part of the police. How many raids has YOUR department conducted with full tactical team, break down the door, style entry looking for $1000 to $2000 off merchandise off of a single stolen credit card where there's no organized crime, gang, or international/immigration/terrorist taskforce element to the case? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:37:59 AM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
See my question above. Pretty much ALL the theft victims of a couple thousand bucks or less cannot get justice. They are told department resources, bla bla bla, we can't investigate everything, cancel your cards, didn't you have fraud protection etc. Hell, stolen items from a car stories are posted on this site all the damn time with no interest or action or follow through other than taking the report on the part of the police. How many raids has YOUR department conducted with full tactical team, break down the door, style entry looking for $1000 to $2000 off merchandise off of a single stolen credit card where there's no organized crime, gang, or international/immigration/terrorist taskforce element to the case? Not my experience at all. The last credit-card theft case I was personally involved in dealt with my wife's business (an employee pinched a company card, and used it all over the place. Gas, food, clothes, cell-phone store...). The detective was all over it. I offered to go around to the various businesses to collect the security videos (because I have experience with that kind of thing), but the officer told me he'd take care of it... and he did. The employee, and the employees spouse both went to jail. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:39:22 AM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
See my question above. Pretty much ALL the theft victims of a couple thousand bucks or less cannot get justice. They are told department resources, bla bla bla, we can't investigate everything, cancel your cards, didn't you have fraud protection etc. Hell, stolen items from a car stories are posted on this site all the damn time with no interest or action or follow through other than taking the report on the part of the police. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That explains a lot. I'm sure the LEOs on this forum will still justify the raid though. So they cops shouldt investigate if the victim is married to a former cop? What other theft victims cant get justice? See my question above. Pretty much ALL the theft victims of a couple thousand bucks or less cannot get justice. They are told department resources, bla bla bla, we can't investigate everything, cancel your cards, didn't you have fraud protection etc. Hell, stolen items from a car stories are posted on this site all the damn time with no interest or action or follow through other than taking the report on the part of the police. Good thing the victim in this case had connections and got some justice then. How many raids has YOUR department conducted with full tactical team, break down the door, style entry looking for $1000 to $2000 off merchandise off of a single stolen credit card where there's no organized crime, gang, or international/immigration/terrorist taskforce element to the case? No idea, I'm not SWAT. Anyway, its Friday, gotta go. I'm kicking in doors tonight, seriously. You guys can keep whining about it on the internet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:39:45 AM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess its a good thing the victim has some connections them. Because it got at least three armed tweeker drug dealing theives arrested so far. If only every theft of credit card case could go so well. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Have you ever tried to get the police to take action on a stolen wallet or purse where a credit card was used by the theifs? Unless its tens of thousands of dollars, you get the whole "cancel your cards and talk to the hand." You don't get a big investigation and all hands on deck warrant service. This would have been on the back burner but for the fact the victim's wife was a buddy's / former officer's spouse. I guess its a good thing the victim has some connections them. Because it got at least three armed tweeker drug dealing theives arrested so far. If only every theft of credit card case could go so well. Perhaps I missed something. I didn't think it was a drug warrant. In fact I know it was not a drug warrant, because I read the fucking thing. Were the perps dirt bags? Fuck yeah. Would the overkill raid have been conducted at all if it were MY wife's stolen credit card? I seriously doubt it. I suppose the other alternative is that the credit card part of this could be a contrived situation from the beginning. Lets see, the guy who STOLE the credit card is listed as a C.I. in the warrant application and didn't get charged. Working with the investigators from the beginning? Perhaps tasked to get that card over to "slim" and his girlfriend (already targeted for drug activity), with the hopes one of the dirt bags would use the card and give p.c. for the warrant so they could go get the drugs? Wouldn't be the first time that sort of thing was done. If the officers were serving that warrant already having targeted the subjects as drug-lords, that would have explained a little better why then went with a tac team (some places serve all drug warrants with a tac team). But if they really thought they were going in there to find a couple thousand dollars of credit card purchased property, it is hard to understand why the devoted the kind of resources to the file -- unless it was as a favor to a buddy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:45:42 AM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not my experience at all. The last credit-card theft case I was personally involved in dealt with my wife's business (an employee pinched a company card, and used it all over the place. Gas, food, clothes, cell-phone store...). The detective was all over it. I offered to go around to the various businesses to collect the security videos (because I have experience with that kind of thing), but the officer told me he'd take care of it... and he did. The employee, and the employees spouse both went to jail. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
See my question above. Pretty much ALL the theft victims of a couple thousand bucks or less cannot get justice. They are told department resources, bla bla bla, we can't investigate everything, cancel your cards, didn't you have fraud protection etc. Hell, stolen items from a car stories are posted on this site all the damn time with no interest or action or follow through other than taking the report on the part of the police. How many raids has YOUR department conducted with full tactical team, break down the door, style entry looking for $1000 to $2000 off merchandise off of a single stolen credit card where there's no organized crime, gang, or international/immigration/terrorist taskforce element to the case? Not my experience at all. The last credit-card theft case I was personally involved in dealt with my wife's business (an employee pinched a company card, and used it all over the place. Gas, food, clothes, cell-phone store...). The detective was all over it. I offered to go around to the various businesses to collect the security videos (because I have experience with that kind of thing), but the officer told me he'd take care of it... and he did. The employee, and the employees spouse both went to jail. 1. How much $$ are we talking about in aggregate? 2. And in the course of investigating and getting those two people off to jail, did the detective and his department mobilize a full tactical team to go kick in those folks' door as if they were raiding a drug operation run by Tony Montana from Scarface? Well? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:49:30 AM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Curtis Pote, who worked as an officer with the Ankeny police department for 12-years, called his former colleagues when his wife’s wallet was stolen. So? Kinda like when the Berkley PD's Chief sent 10 Officers to Oakland looking for his Son's stolen iPhone.......... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:51:29 AM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1. How much $$ are we talking about in aggregate? 2. And in the course of investigating and getting those two people off to jail, did the detective and his department mobilize a full tactical team to go kick in those folks' door as if they were raiding a drug operation run by Tony Montana from Scarface? Well? IIRC, it didn't even crack $1000. And they didn't use a tac-team, as far as I know... but neither of the perps were known armed/violent people. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 11:57:39 AM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
IIRC, it didn't even crack $1000. And they didn't use a tac-team, as far as I know... but neither of the perps were known armed/violent people. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
1. How much $$ are we talking about in aggregate? 2. And in the course of investigating and getting those two people off to jail, did the detective and his department mobilize a full tactical team to go kick in those folks' door as if they were raiding a drug operation run by Tony Montana from Scarface? Well? IIRC, it didn't even crack $1000. And they didn't use a tac-team, as far as I know... but neither of the perps were known armed/violent people. As to the first point, I wish the department where I live would go after that kind of thing. I'm glad yours did. I wonder if the department in this story falls into the group of departments like yours, or like mine. As to the second point, lets be clear. "Known armed/violent" people is pouring it on a little thick. Go read the warrant application. What they had was a guy with some very old record, and another guy with a concealed carry license. I mean, give me a break. If the police thought these guys were seriously dangerous they would have APPLIED for a no knock warrant. (Or maybe not, since they obviously serve knock and announce warrants as no knock warrants anyway). |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 12:04:17 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The big lesson for me is to have cameras in plain sight, and then hidden cameras to capture what happens when Officer Friendly pulls down the decoys. Definitely this with streaming to a cloud storage service or three... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 12:14:10 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As to the first point, I wish the department where I live would go after that kind of thing. I'm glad yours did. I wonder if the department in this story falls into the group of departments like yours, or like mine. As to the second point, lets be clear. "Known armed/violent" people is pouring it on a little thick. Go read the warrant application. What they had was a guy with some very old record, and another guy with a concealed carry license. I mean, give me a break. If the police thought these guys were seriously dangerous they would have APPLIED for a no knock warrant. (Or maybe not, since they obviously serve knock and announce warrants as no knock warrants anyway). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. How much $$ are we talking about in aggregate? 2. And in the course of investigating and getting those two people off to jail, did the detective and his department mobilize a full tactical team to go kick in those folks' door as if they were raiding a drug operation run by Tony Montana from Scarface? Well? IIRC, it didn't even crack $1000. And they didn't use a tac-team, as far as I know... but neither of the perps were known armed/violent people. As to the first point, I wish the department where I live would go after that kind of thing. I'm glad yours did. I wonder if the department in this story falls into the group of departments like yours, or like mine. As to the second point, lets be clear. "Known armed/violent" people is pouring it on a little thick. Go read the warrant application. What they had was a guy with some very old record, and another guy with a concealed carry license. I mean, give me a break. If the police thought these guys were seriously dangerous they would have APPLIED for a no knock warrant. (Or maybe not, since they obviously serve knock and announce warrants as no knock warrants anyway). They're not the same thing, you know... In this case, there was a pretty short interval between knocking-and-ramming... but I can understand that if they heard the people frantically hauling ass around inside (which you can clearly see on the camera). When I was doing SWAT, my team would breach more quickly if we saw/heard people yelling and scrambling rather than answering the door... because that usually meant they were destroying evidence, fleeing/hiding, or grabbing for a weapon. The real-deal no-knocks I've been involved with weren't served like that. Unless it was a warrant-of-opportunity (where we got a tip during the day that the suspect had been spotted at a location, and we had to rush to get them with time working against us), we virtually always hit them at night... and we went full-bore. We're talking flash-bangs, rams or explosive-breach, multi-point entry and/or break-and-rake+gunporting of windows/rooms. They were virtually always fortified drug houses with bad guys and much drugs inside. This was not a no-knock. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 12:14:16 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Definitely this with streaming to a cloud storage service or three... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The big lesson for me is to have cameras in plain sight, and then hidden cameras to capture what happens when Officer Friendly pulls down the decoys. Definitely this with streaming to a cloud storage service or three... I'd say the lesson, the real lesson -- as always, is not to associate with and/or bring dirtbags into your home as you cannot be assured that the police will exercise discretion or proportionality if they come knocking. The other lesson is to fear for the day when you will be categorized as a dirt bag for the very (dangerous) crime of being a gun owner. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 12:16:14 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Definitely this with streaming to a cloud storage service or three... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The big lesson for me is to have cameras in plain sight, and then hidden cameras to capture what happens when Officer Friendly pulls down the decoys. Definitely this with streaming to a cloud storage service or three... You know they were still searching/clearing when they covered the basement camera, right? Watch the second video linked in the follow-up story just up the page from your post. Suspects have just been secured on the couch, and officers are still moving/searching. Screen-grab: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 12:29:13 PM EST
[#41]
Hmmm... seems like it's getting to the point in this country that every home needs security cameras that upload what they see to the cloud as they record.
I've been planning on getting a camera system for my house for a while... guess if I'm gonna do it, I might as well set them up to record off-site from the get-go. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 12:32:58 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They're not the same thing, you know... In this case, there was a pretty short interval between knocking-and-ramming... but I can understand that if they heard the people frantically hauling ass around inside (which you can clearly see on the camera). When I was doing SWAT, my team would breach more quickly if we saw/heard people yelling and scrambling rather than answering the door... because that usually meant they were destroying evidence, fleeing/hiding, or grabbing for a weapon. The real-deal no-knocks I've been involved with weren't served like that. Unless it was a warrant-of-opportunity (where we got a tip during the day that the suspect had been spotted at a location, and we had to rush to get them with time working against us), we virtually always hit them at night... and we went full-bore. We're talking flash-bangs, rams or explosive-breach, multi-point entry and/or break-and-rake+gunporting of windows/rooms. They were virtually always fortified drug houses with bad guys and much drugs inside. This was not a no-knock. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. How much $$ are we talking about in aggregate? 2. And in the course of investigating and getting those two people off to jail, did the detective and his department mobilize a full tactical team to go kick in those folks' door as if they were raiding a drug operation run by Tony Montana from Scarface? Well? IIRC, it didn't even crack $1000. And they didn't use a tac-team, as far as I know... but neither of the perps were known armed/violent people. As to the first point, I wish the department where I live would go after that kind of thing. I'm glad yours did. I wonder if the department in this story falls into the group of departments like yours, or like mine. As to the second point, lets be clear. "Known armed/violent" people is pouring it on a little thick. Go read the warrant application. What they had was a guy with some very old record, and another guy with a concealed carry license. I mean, give me a break. If the police thought these guys were seriously dangerous they would have APPLIED for a no knock warrant. (Or maybe not, since they obviously serve knock and announce warrants as no knock warrants anyway). They're not the same thing, you know... In this case, there was a pretty short interval between knocking-and-ramming... but I can understand that if they heard the people frantically hauling ass around inside (which you can clearly see on the camera). When I was doing SWAT, my team would breach more quickly if we saw/heard people yelling and scrambling rather than answering the door... because that usually meant they were destroying evidence, fleeing/hiding, or grabbing for a weapon. The real-deal no-knocks I've been involved with weren't served like that. Unless it was a warrant-of-opportunity (where we got a tip during the day that the suspect had been spotted at a location, and we had to rush to get them with time working against us), we virtually always hit them at night... and we went full-bore. We're talking flash-bangs, rams or explosive-breach, multi-point entry and/or break-and-rake+gunporting of windows/rooms. They were virtually always fortified drug houses with bad guys and much drugs inside. This was not a no-knock. Again... unless this was all a big ruse to go after what they already thought was a drug house, the "rushing around" would not be of much moment. Its not like they're going to flush a 42 inch wide screen TV, a bunch of cell phones, clothes, and a red box DVD. I understand the technical difference between a true no knock and a knock and announce. My point is that here, and I've watched the video a few times, you can tell there was never any intention to give anyone the time to answer the door. That's a problem in my view. Again, they were there for a property warrant. The rush rush rush of trying to keep a kilo of cocain from hitting the sewers should not have been on their minds if they were there for what teh warrant said they were there for. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 12:33:37 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hmmm... seems like it's getting to the point in this country that every home needs security cameras that upload what they see to the cloud as they record. I've been planning on getting a camera system for my house for a while... guess if I'm gonna do it, I might as well set them up to record off-site from the get-go. This video didn't get "disappeared." But I understand what you're saying. I have video that's stored off-site... and I think it's a sensible precaution. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 12:36:02 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hmmm... seems like it's getting to the point in this country that every home needs security cameras that upload what they see to the cloud as they record. I've been planning on getting a camera system for my house for a while... guess if I'm gonna do it, I might as well set them up to record off-site from the get-go. Just be aware that the EXISTENCE of a camera, has been articulated (and accepted by judges) as grounds to believe criminality is afoot and to go in hot. The pastor of the church catercorner from my house asked if I'd put up a camera pointed at his church because they had some vandalism. I politely declined for the reason that I don't do cameras, precisely because law enforcement treats them as some sort of grounds for attention. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 12:37:47 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just be aware that the EXISTENCE of a camera, has been articulated (and accepted by judges) as grounds to believe criminality is afoot and to go in hot. The pastor of the church catercorner from my house asked if I'd put up a camera pointed at his church because they had some vandalism. I politely declined for the reason that I don't do cameras, precisely because law enforcement treats them as some sort of grounds for attention. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Hmmm... seems like it's getting to the point in this country that every home needs security cameras that upload what they see to the cloud as they record. I've been planning on getting a camera system for my house for a while... guess if I'm gonna do it, I might as well set them up to record off-site from the get-go. Just be aware that the EXISTENCE of a camera, has been articulated (and accepted by judges) as grounds to believe criminality is afoot and to go in hot. The pastor of the church catercorner from my house asked if I'd put up a camera pointed at his church because they had some vandalism. I politely declined for the reason that I don't do cameras, precisely because law enforcement treats them as some sort of grounds for attention. All the more reason that you should have them! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 12:41:27 PM EST
[#46]
chick is guilty as hell, that's at least the one sure fucking thing
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 1:16:50 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All the more reason that you should have them! Hiden... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Hmmm... seems like it's getting to the point in this country that every home needs security cameras that upload what they see to the cloud as they record. I've been planning on getting a camera system for my house for a while... guess if I'm gonna do it, I might as well set them up to record off-site from the get-go. Just be aware that the EXISTENCE of a camera, has been articulated (and accepted by judges) as grounds to believe criminality is afoot and to go in hot. The pastor of the church catercorner from my house asked if I'd put up a camera pointed at his church because they had some vandalism. I politely declined for the reason that I don't do cameras, precisely because law enforcement treats them as some sort of grounds for attention. All the more reason that you should have them! Hiden... Fify......... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 2:14:20 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
no, but they should be disabled. from the video, external cameras were damaged, internal cameras were covered. your house doesnt have rights. covering the camera no more violates your rights then turning the lights off when we leave. Right, because fuck accountability. Are you serious with this bullshit? Let me put it this way, first, because "my house doesn't have rights", that makes it ok to destroy or tamper with my private property? To be clear, I'm referring explicitly to the cameras here. Second, if someone who was not a LEO were to cover or destroy a camera someplace they (ostensibly) legally have a right to be, and supposedly not engaged in criminal activity, would you find that a bit...odd? And third, let's say for the sake of argument that the officers involved have the right to destroy or tamper with recording equipment, and their actions throughout are entirely above-board. Can you not see how there would be at least a perception of misconduct? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 2:36:15 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Their justification for tac team was (a), gun in the house and (b) dude in the house with decade + old history of violent conduct. That was the justification for the tac team on the raid. But I think what folks are saying (and I tend to agree) is the reason this even got to the point where it was investigated as thoroughly as it was, where a warrant was sought, and where the "overkill" came from was the fact this was a fellow officer as victim case. Have you ever tried to get the police to take action on a stolen wallet or purse where a credit card was used by the theifs? Unless its tens of thousands of dollars, you get the whole "cancel your cards and talk to the hand." You don't get a big investigation and all hands on deck warrant service. This would have been on the back burner but for the fact the victim's wife was a buddy's / former officer's spouse. You know it, I know it, and when the defense attorneys subpoena all the investigation emails (if they haven't already been "accidentally" purged), the jury will know it. Depends on the dept and the leads/suspect info. What's the defense attorney going to claim - that his clients shouldn't have been arrested because the cops don't normally respond to $1000 CC theft? Good luck with that defense........... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2014 2:43:18 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just be aware that the EXISTENCE of a camera, has been articulated (and accepted by judges) as grounds to believe criminality is afoot and to go in hot. The pastor of the church catercorner from my house asked if I'd put up a camera pointed at his church because they had some vandalism. I politely declined for the reason that I don't do cameras, precisely because law enforcement treats them as some sort of grounds for attention. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Hmmm... seems like it's getting to the point in this country that every home needs security cameras that upload what they see to the cloud as they record. I've been planning on getting a camera system for my house for a while... guess if I'm gonna do it, I might as well set them up to record off-site from the get-go. Just be aware that the EXISTENCE of a camera, has been articulated (and accepted by judges) as grounds to believe criminality is afoot and to go in hot. The pastor of the church catercorner from my house asked if I'd put up a camera pointed at his church because they had some vandalism. I politely declined for the reason that I don't do cameras, precisely because law enforcement treats them as some sort of grounds for attention. Please provide some background on this claim. I'd say the cops are more likely to come over and ask if you happened to catch any footage of the vandalism and that would, gasp, lead to a friendly discussion of things in the neighborhood. But then again I don't have stock in Reynolds Aluminum.......... |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
