Court Finds Sheriff’s Raid to Find Blogger Who Criticized Him Unconstitutional | Hacker News Reader

Court Finds Sheriff’s Raid to Find Blogger Who Criticized Him Unconstitutional

theintercept.com

83 pointsheadShrinker22 comments

I'm surprised that the original warrants were signed in the first place.

And who the hell approved a raid? What happened to two police officers knocking on your door? Why are all suspects considered felons (the only offense class I can conceive of that could deserve a raid) for the purpose of serving a warrant? Do police pay for damages in cases where a raid is excessive force?

It would seem that a raid is never excessive force :/

> I'm surprised that the original warrants were signed in the first place.

No, no surprise there.

Cops/Sheriffs are not the only corrupt arm of the criminal justice system. The whole system is messed up.

It's a lot easier to get rid of a cop or a sheriff, than a judge too; no shock that the rot really sets in on the bench. Then, there's the reality that many judges are political appointees.

> Do police pay for damages in cases where a raid is excessive force?

Generally speaking no. Even if it looks really bad and they honestly want to make amends, they wont as doing so may be seen as an admission of wrongdoing either usable in or encouraging of a lawsuit. As a general rule, damage done during the execution of a warrant will not be covered by the police or their insurance provider.

They're generally sued actually, and when they really fucked up they pay a LOT as a result.

> they pay a LOT as a result.

They don't pay a bit. We, on the other hand, pay and don't receive value for our money.

That... is a good point. I forgot that it's taxpayers suing ourselves.

Goddamn it.

Except that many/most local governments are in turn covered by insurance. So suing them is not fundamentally different than suing a private citizen with similar insurance. Both costs are born by the pool of insurance purchasers, private and public.

ITT: I learn just how pitifully limited and inaccurate my knowledge of insurance is. Is there a good place to learn more about this topic, online?

The insurance is likely owned by "us" anyways through our mutual funds, retirement plans, etc. And high insurance fees come out of our pocket directly as well by making such policies more expensive in the next city.

The issue though is that it's not the pockets of the guilty. Officers are almost entirely shielded from the legal and financial costs of the damage they do.

When we ask "Why do they behave like that?" the answer is because they can, and there's literally no reason for them not to. They're literally consequence free.

> I'm surprised that the original warrants were signed in the first place.

The warrant was signed by a judge who was not on duty at the time.

> Do police pay for damages in cases where a raid is excessive force?

As one example, this happened near me last year: http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/paramilitary-thugs-colorado-...

In fact, the whole story is a great representation of the concerns expressed in your comment - the PD literally blew up a house to catch a suspected shop lifter.

Edit: Looks like PD offered him $5,000 after the incident, and then he had to take them to federal court. Looks like the court proceedings are still going; how utterly insulting.

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/08/03/homeowner-sues-greenwoo...

Unconstitutional, but I would rather them have declared it outright illegal. Unconstitutional means the evidence gathered cannot/probably will not be used in the case against the blogger. It means that the inevitable civil rights complaint will have more teeth. But the people who did the raid are not in handcuffs. The court is not identifying a criminal act, nor really is that their role.

The FBI, state, or some other higher agency will have to investigate at their leisure, if they even want to get involved. Such decisions have consequences in an election year. I would rather allow judges to initiate prosecutions, or at least have them force the prosecution's hand where the wrongdoing of law enforcement is so obvious.

> On August 15, Larpenter was supposed to be honored for his service to the community by being inducted into the Louisiana Justice Hall of Fame.

That says it all!

and this one instance is the only one we know of that Larpenter overstepped the bounds of his authority.

Note that he's still scheduled to get the award. It was rescheduled due to flooding.

I wish it was the neighbor using their wifi because it was a wep based setup and that's the ip AT&T gave so they raid and screw up the wrong guys house. But one side it happens all the time.

Seems like more questions should be asked during this whole thing. I want a warrant for a ip of a Facebook user / why ? / because he said mean things about me./ oh he's not a real threat and didn't really break the law...no.

Sunshine, light, and visibility -- one of the best disinfectants out there.

Autoclaving is said to be the best of disinfectants; warrantless wiretapping the most efficient policeman.

All great and dandy, but I can't help to think what the continued fallout is going to be.

If someone is willing to smash your door down because you called them out on their dealings or perceived dealings, then that person is a threat to your safety.

> On August 15, Larpenter was supposed to be honored for his service to the community by being inducted into the Louisiana Justice Hall of Fame. The ceremony was rescheduled because of flooding.

Makes me wonder what the criteria are.

It's Louisiana. No surprise. [1]

From Huey Long to Ray Nagin, and now this guy, there is a lot of filler material in between to help anyone grasp what corruption in public officials looks like.

[1] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2412634/Louisiana-to...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com