More context on the SWAT team and the 2-year old

cnn.com

2 points·gr2020··2 comments

> A confidential informant hours earlier had purchased methamphetamine at the house, the sheriff says. The informant told police that there were men standing guard outside the home, and it was unclear whether they were armed, according to CNN affiliate WGCL.

That makes it even worse: 'confidential informants' (snitches) are notorious for lying and making shit up in order to appear as helpful as possible, and cops of all people should know that. They didn't even bother to check any of the claims? I certainly do hope they're 'devastated' and are learning the right lesson here..

Police organizations don't seem to be particularly good at learning lessons from these sorts of mishaps.

I heard a story a number of years ago in Silver Spring, MD, about how the police were confused by a large marijuana delivery they intercepted to an unwitting person's address, who was arrested, and would have been charged and likely convicted under the circumstances. It turns out the driver was the intended recipient, which they discovered the very next week when another delivery was intercepted at the warehouse, with the driver in common.

This isn't an uncommon tale.

And yet, barely a few years later, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berwyn_Heights,_Maryland_mayor'..., with the key result of the sheriff declaring, despite the killing of the mayor's two dogs after breaching the door, "We'd do it again. Tonight."

Cautionary tales like this should spread like wildfire, but it appears that perhaps they do not, or LEA are rather immovable with respect to their suspicions.

(and apparently I know very little about the relationship between cities and law enforcement in Maryland; it's more complicated than I thought)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com