Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Atlanta Narco Squad: Cops Gone Wild

Comments

27 comments

  • p3skyking
    wow!
    0
  • turtles11756
    never did think much of narco cops
    0
  • awinds
    The whole da(m)rned city and the administration is just as bad, or worse. It's the a-hole of Georgia. Thank the Lord I don't live there.
    [xx(]
    0
  • bpost
    Why does our society allow a premeditated murder with extenuating circumstances by law officers go with a slap on the wrist.

    Public officials misusing power should have to pay a higher price for breaking the public trust.

    These miserable suns-of-beeches MURDERED a old woman and ruined God knows how many innocent lives.

    I say they deserve a super fair trial where all avenues of association are discussed and disclosed in a public venue. Then; after being duly found GUILTY removed to death row where they can be executed by lethal injection before the end of the year.

    Their conduct is utterly reprehensible and unjustly taint all LEOS.
    0
  • dcinffxva
    There have been plenty of times on here where I have chastised others for making judgements on partial information on police conduct, however, if the information reported is true, then I completely agree that the officers involved should be hung out to dry.

    The reported conduct is not that of police officers, but a gang of thugs that happen to have a badge.

    I don't recall if I gave anyone grief over this incident, but if I did, my apologies are offered.
    0
  • alledan
    This is your govments at work-enjoy![:0][:(][xx(]
    0
  • JamesRK
    Part of the problem is the "no knock" search warrant. Search warrants should be "served", not shown to the survivors after the fact.

    The main justification for the "no knock" warrant is to avoid the destruction of evidence and the "element of surprise" for people the police think will resist.

    The suspect might be able to flush a joint or two while the police identify themselves, but I don't think anybody will flush a kilo of anything in the amount of time it takes to say "Police, search warrant". As for the element of surprise, take an extra man and have him watch the back door.

    If the evidence is lost in a case or two, or a few thousand, I think that is preferable the loss of innocent life, including police officers.

    I don't think the "no knock" search warrant is Constitutional. I know the Supreme Court's opinion on that carries more weight than mine, but even if it is Constitutional, it's certainly bad policy.

    When somebody comes crashing through my front door any time of the day or night I'll come up shooting. I don't think it will make my widow feel any better knowing it was a mistake and I was in the wrong.
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    quote:Originally posted by bpost1958
    Why does our society allow a premeditated murder with extenuating circumstances by law officers go with a slap on the wrist.

    Public officials misusing power should have to pay a higher price for breaking the public trust.

    These miserable suns-of-beeches MURDERED a old woman and ruined God knows how many innocent lives.

    I say they deserve a super fair trial where all avenues of association are discussed and disclosed in a public venue. Then; after being duly found GUILTY removed to death row where they can be executed by lethal injection before the end of the year.

    Their conduct is utterly reprehensible and unjustly taint all LEOS.


    +1
    0
  • zipperzap
    Philly cops went through the same thing about 25 years ago.

    ... and, unfortunately, the cockroaches took over the city and
    God help you if you stray two blocks off Market or Chestnut.

    Honest cops are terrific but there seems to be a trade off in
    the long run. ... it's pretty much a 'human' nature thing.

    ... thinking about it ... same thing happened in Chicago and
    Los Angeles, more recently.

    There's no more 'fear factor' that the cockroaches have to be
    concerned about.[:(]
    0
  • PC800
    quote:Originally posted by JamesRK
    Part of the problem is the "no knock" search warrant. Search warrants should be "served", not shown to the survivors after the fact.

    The main justification for the "no knock" warrant is to avoid the destruction of evidence and the "element of surprise" for people the police think will resist.

    The suspect might be able to flush a joint or two while the police identify themselves, but I don't think anybody will flush a kilo of anything in the amount of time it takes to say "Police, search warrant". As for the element of surprise, take an extra man and have him watch the back door.

    If the evidence is lost in a case or two, or a few thousand, I think that is preferable the loss of innocent life, including police officers.

    I don't think the "no knock" search warrant is Constitutional. I know the Supreme Court's opinion on that carries more weight than mine, but even if it is Constitutional, it's certainly bad policy.

    When somebody comes crashing through my front door any time of the day or night I'll come up shooting. I don't think it will make my widow feel any better knowing it was a mistake and I was in the wrong.


    Totally agree. And remember, the WWII Supreme Court said the internment of Japanese in America was constitutional also. Just because they say so, doesn't make it right.
    0
  • Colt Super
    Not Politically Correct, again.

    Interning the Japanese during WWII was the correct thing to do.

    Doug
    0
  • warriorsfan
    quote:Originally posted by Doug Wilson
    Not Politically Correct, again.

    Interning the Japanese during WWII was the correct thing to do.

    Doug


    The 442nd Regimental Combat Team, made up of Japanese-Americans, was the highest decorated unit of WWII based on size. They had 22 Medal of Honor recipients. And while these men fought and died on the battlefields of Europe, their families were interned in Concentration Camps here in America.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/442nd_Regimental_Combat_Team


    And do you have any evidence to support your assertion that the Japanese-Americans on the West Coast were a threat to the United States? Because not a SINGLE Japanese-American was ever convicted of espionage during the entire course of the war. Not a SINGLE one. And why weren't German-Americans interned in as great of numbers as the Japanese? We know that there were Germans-Americans who were loyal to Hitler and sent men to Germany to fight for the Reich (the German-American Bund) and the Germans DID send agents to the United States for espionage purposes. But of course, they were white, so no need to strip German-Americans of their property and homes and deny them all Constitutional and Civil Rights during wartime.
    0
  • Rocklobster
    quote:Originally posted by awinds
    The whole da(m)rned city and the administration is just as bad, or worse. It's the a-hole of Georgia. Thank the Lord I don't live there.
    [xx(]


    The sad thing is that those pukes represent our entire state. People around the country see the activities of those morons and think that all of Georgia is the same.
    0
  • Rack Ops
    quote:Originally posted by allen griggs

    What started with a few bags of marijuana being planted near a suspected street dealer quickly spiraled out of control. Narcotics officers lied to a judge, illegally broke into 92-year-old Kathryn Johnston's house, fired 39 shots at her - and then one handcuffed her as she lay bleeding before he planted drugs in her basement.


    Damn.....Sounds like an episode of "The Shield"
    0
  • PC800
    quote:Originally posted by Rack Ops
    quote:Originally posted by allen griggs

    What started with a few bags of marijuana being planted near a suspected street dealer quickly spiraled out of control. Narcotics officers lied to a judge, illegally broke into 92-year-old Kathryn Johnston's house, fired 39 shots at her - and then one handcuffed her as she lay bleeding before he planted drugs in her basement.


    Damn.....Sounds like an episode of "The Shield"


    Gotta wonder if they used The Shield as training material.
    0
  • mrseatle
    [8]
    0
  • Fatboy lives
    Accepted.quote:Originally posted by dcinffxva
    There have been plenty of times on here where I have chastised others for making judgements on partial information on police conduct, however, if the information reported is true, then I completely agree that the officers involved should be hung out to dry.

    The reported conduct is not that of police officers, but a gang of thugs that happen to have a badge.

    I don't recall if I gave anyone grief over this incident, but if I did, my apologies are offered.
    0
  • KSUmarksman
    the whole "war on drugs" is a warcrime.

    While I understand the need to keep hard drugs out, I do not understand the ferver with which law enforcement pursues marijuana. The stuff is far less addictive than cigarettes and is probably marginally more effective at getting you high. I wouldn't know firsthand, my only drugs are booze and adrenaline (that is I like to take risks and do dumb things).

    Would it not be cheaper in dollars and innocent lives to just legalize pot and apply the proper taxes, like they do with tobacco?
    0
  • p3skyking
    quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
    the whole "war on drugs" is a warcrime.

    While I understand the need to keep hard drugs out, I do not understand the ferver with which law enforcement pursues marijuana. The stuff is far less addictive than cigarettes and is probably marginally more effective at getting you high. I wouldn't know firsthand, my only drugs are booze and adrenaline (that is I like to take risks and do dumb things).

    Would it not be cheaper in dollars and innocent lives to just legalize pot and apply the proper taxes, like they do with tobacco?


    No, the war on drugs is the biggest money maker the criminal justice system has. They can legally steal land, boats, cars, aircraft, money, and anything that money can buy.

    Think of the hundreds of thousands of cops, jailers, lawyers, bail bondsmen, dog breeders, judges, DEA agents, probation officers, DHR personnel, prison construction companies, crime labs, court reporters, etc., that would lose their jobs if pot was made legal. The alcohol industry would probably collapse also. [xx(]
    0
  • p3skyking
    But if pot were made legal, stock in rolling papers and fertilizer would probably go up.[}:)][:p]
    0
  • nemesisenforcer
    quote:Originally posted by JamesRK
    Part of the problem is the "no knock" search warrant. Search warrants should be "served", not shown to the survivors after the fact.

    The main justification for the "no knock" warrant is to avoid the destruction of evidence and the "element of surprise" for people the police think will resist.

    The suspect might be able to flush a joint or two while the police identify themselves, but I don't think anybody will flush a kilo of anything in the amount of time it takes to say "Police, search warrant". As for the element of surprise, take an extra man and have him watch the back door.

    If the evidence is lost in a case or two, or a few thousand, I think that is preferable the loss of innocent life, including police officers.

    I don't think the "no knock" search warrant is Constitutional. I know the Supreme Court's opinion on that carries more weight than mine, but even if it is Constitutional, it's certainly bad policy.

    When somebody comes crashing through my front door any time of the day or night I'll come up shooting. I don't think it will make my widow feel any better knowing it was a mistake and I was in the wrong.


    I tend to agree with the court that "no knock" warrants are Constitutionally permissable. But I agree with you that just because something is VALID under the constitution doens't mean it's the best possible approach. I think in limited circumstances and for some crimes for some suspects, they're a useful tool, but it's been overapplied and the times when they are used become broader and more commonplace, leading to this.

    That being said, there will never be a perfect, error-free system. However, when error does happen, as in this case, people, especially LEOs, need to be held accountable and punished, as does the police department as a whole, thorough costly civil suits.
    0
  • KSUmarksman
    quote:Originally posted by p3skyking
    quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
    the whole "war on drugs" is a warcrime.

    While I understand the need to keep hard drugs out, I do not understand the ferver with which law enforcement pursues marijuana. The stuff is far less addictive than cigarettes and is probably marginally more effective at getting you high. I wouldn't know firsthand, my only drugs are booze and adrenaline (that is I like to take risks and do dumb things).

    Would it not be cheaper in dollars and innocent lives to just legalize pot and apply the proper taxes, like they do with tobacco?


    No, the war on drugs is the biggest money maker the criminal justice system has. They can legally steal land, boats, cars, aircraft, money, and anything that money can buy.

    Think of the hundreds of thousands of cops, jailers, lawyers, bail bondsmen, dog breeders, judges, DEA agents, probation officers, DHR personnel, prison construction companies, crime labs, court reporters, etc., that would lose their jobs if pot was made legal. The alcohol industry would probably collapse also. [xx(]


    send teh trigger-happy people who can't hold a real job to Iraq, the they can learn what real combat is like [:p]
    0
  • ElMuertoMonkey
    No-knock warrants certainly fall within the parameters of the Constitution - if there is a reasonable expectation that key evidence will be lost if the element of surprise is given up, then by all means, issue that no-knock warrant. The Constitution protects us from "unreasonable" search and seizure, not "all."

    What I find worrying, however, is how "reasonable" is interpreted nowadays. A lot of police departments seem to be justifying shoddy, negligent, or downright criminal behavior in the name of convenience.

    Their job is a thankless one, but it is also a selfless one - police officers are there to serve the public trust, not indulge their private fantasies.
    0
  • allen griggs
    Atlanta Police Chief Richard Pennington denied that there is a quota system for Atlanta police.
    I was listening to Atlanta talk radio late last night. Sources in the Atlanta PD insist that there is a quota system for Atlanta narcotics officers. They said it is called a system of "nine and two."
    This means that a narcotics officer must make nine arrests and serve two search warrants every month or he gets into trouble.

    Another thing made clear last night was how this incident began. On the morning of Nov. 21 Officers Junnier and Smith raided a house and got several bags of marijuana, but nobody was there so they made no arrests. They did not take the marijuana to the evidence locker.
    Later that day they encountered a low level dealer, a guy who had 4 arrests on his rap sheet. They searched this guy, but he was clean. They showed this guy the marijuana, and told him that he had better snitch someone out for a coke bust, or they would plant the marijuana bags on him and haul him in. With his priors, he was facing serious jail time.
    This guy then told Junnier and Smith that he had bought coke at 933 Neal Street. This was a complete fabrication, but the cops went ahead with their raid at that address.
    0
  • nemesisenforcer
    quote:Originally posted by ElMuertoMonkey
    No-knock warrants certainly fall within the parameters of the Constitution - if there is a reasonable expectation that key evidence will be lost if the element of surprise is given up, then by all means, issue that no-knock warrant. The Constitution protects us from "unreasonable" search and seizure, not "all."

    What I find worrying, however, is how "reasonable" is interpreted nowadays. A lot of police departments seem to be justifying shoddy, negligent, or downright criminal behavior in the name of convenience.

    Their job is a thankless one, but it is also a selfless one - police officers are there to serve the public trust, not indulge their private fantasies.


    Exactly. While it may be reasonable to have a procedure like no-knocks in place for certain, narrow circumstances, with they way they're overused, something like this was bound to happen. The Supremes were right to uphold the validity of no-knocks, but police departments that issue them like they're any other warrant are wrong to do so.
    0
  • JamesRK
    quote:Originally posted by ElMuertoMonkey
    No-knock warrants certainly fall within the parameters of the Constitution - if there is a reasonable expectation that key evidence will be lost if the element of surprise is given up, then by all means, issue that no-knock warrant. The Constitution protects us from "unreasonable" search and seizure, not "all."

    What I find worrying, however, is how "reasonable" is interpreted nowadays. A lot of police departments seem to be justifying shoddy, negligent, or downright criminal behavior in the name of convenience.

    Their job is a thankless one, but it is also a selfless one - police officers are there to serve the public trust, not indulge their private fantasies.

    The key word is "unreasonable". Is it reasonable for a gang of people to come crashing through your door at 3:00 AM? I don't think so. It's not the first time the Supreme Court has disagreed with me. Since there are nine of them and just one of me, I guess we'll go along with their decision, at least for now.
    0
  • nemesisenforcer
    quote:Originally posted by JamesRK
    quote:Originally posted by ElMuertoMonkey
    No-knock warrants certainly fall within the parameters of the Constitution - if there is a reasonable expectation that key evidence will be lost if the element of surprise is given up, then by all means, issue that no-knock warrant. The Constitution protects us from "unreasonable" search and seizure, not "all."

    What I find worrying, however, is how "reasonable" is interpreted nowadays. A lot of police departments seem to be justifying shoddy, negligent, or downright criminal behavior in the name of convenience.

    Their job is a thankless one, but it is also a selfless one - police officers are there to serve the public trust, not indulge their private fantasies.

    The key word is "unreasonable". Is it reasonable for a gang of people to come crashing through your door at 3:00 AM? I don't think so.


    It might be. Like I said, it depends on the circumstances. Would it be reasonable to employ such a method while looking for a stolen piece of electronics equipment? Likely not. But it might be reasonable to do so when confronting a heavily armed gang with a violent history and the potential loss of incriminating evidence. It's an intensely fact-driven analysis, as my profs say.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity

Didn’t find what you’re looking for?