• Welcome to New Hampshire Underground.
 

News:

Please log in on the special "login" page, not on any of these normal pages. Thank you, The Procrastinating Management

"Let them march all they want, as long as they pay their taxes."  --Alexander Haig

Main Menu

Oops ... police hit the wrong house in porn raid

Started by Kat Kanning, October 05, 2006, 09:22 AM NHFT

Previous topic - Next topic

Kat Kanning

I guess this is a reason to not use force...you might get it wrong.




Oops ... police hit the wrong house in porn raid

AP | October 5 2006

SPOKANE -- For a 67-year-old homeowner and his wife, wrongly subjected to a shattering pornography search, saying, "Oops, wrong number" is not enough.

Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich apologized Tuesday for the blunder, which he said resulted when Detective Timothy Hines tried to nail whoever was responsible for obscene calls to at least 20 women enrolled at Whitworth College.

Hines wrote down the wrong figures for a telephone number associated with the calls, and he obtained a search warrant for a house in Spokane, miles from the correct location in suburban Spokane Valley, Knezovich said.

The irate homeowner told The Spokesman-Review, which did not identify him at his request, that deputies dumped out drawers, went through his wallet and checkbook, seized computers, CDs, floppy disks, VHS tapes and other material and refused to clean up the mess in the raid Sept. 27.

A half-dozen sheriff's vehicles converged on the house, and after taking photos outside, Hines told officers within hearing of the neighbors, "Now let's go inside and get some porn," the owner said.

"It's like the gang that can't do it right," he said. "They shoot themselves in the foot, and then they all come to make peace.

"What would you do if somebody came to your door and ripped your whole house apart, turned everything upside down and said you are a porno freak?"

Among the confiscated items were copies of "The Lion King" and "Snow White," found in a bedroom where the couple's granddaughter stays when she comes to visit, the man said.

The victim said he had hired a lawyer. He did not say whether he planned to sue but told the newspaper, "I'm not going to be treated like this and dragged around."

Hines realized his mistake Monday when he checked the accuracy of the phone number with a telephone company, sheriff's Capt. Bruce Mathews said.

By then the target of the search -- a 40-year-old man who used parts of his name to contrive aliases -- was gone.

Knezovich said he plans to adopt a more structured system for checking facts in search warrants, adding that Hines probably would not be disciplined.

"I could see it if it was a blatant lack of diligence," the sheriff said, "but sometimes things like that happen.

"A number can get transposed."

cathleeninnh

Is it just Spokane, or is it just as bad in any city?

Another Spokane raid only this one was 'indicated'.

http://www.newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter27.htm


Cathleen

earthhaven


d_goddard

Quote from: Kat Kanning on October 05, 2006, 09:22 AM NHFT
Hines wrote down the wrong figures for a telephone number associated with the calls
Clearly, the police department needs a computerized, automated system to track all calls. That way when suspicious calls are made, the system can emai the judge directly, asking for a warrant.
Of course, that's expensive, so we'll need a new tax.
Don't worry, though -- once the new tax is in place, the other, more oppressive taxes will go down a little.

And then everything will be fine... just fine...

estoves

Why do they do porn raids?
Porn isn't ilegal or was it childporn they were looking for.

Kat Kanning


PinoX7

Quote from: d_goddard on October 05, 2006, 12:06 PM NHFT
Quote from: Kat Kanning on October 05, 2006, 09:22 AM NHFT
Hines wrote down the wrong figures for a telephone number associated with the calls
Clearly, the police department needs a computerized, automated system to track all calls. That way when suspicious calls are made, the system can emai the judge directly, asking for a warrant.
Of course, that's expensive, so we'll need a new tax.
Don't worry, though -- once the new tax is in place, the other, more oppressive taxes will go down a little.

And then everything will be fine... just fine...

im being sincear when i say that, reverse pshycology is an awsome way to get people to understand the magnitude of the situation

lildog

Quote from: estoves on October 07, 2006, 04:05 AM NHFT
Why do they do porn raids?
Porn isn't ilegal or was it childporn they were looking for.

There are comunities that have local decency laws.  A friend of mine from college who was a real perv moved south and couldn't get over the fact he couldn't even find a place that sold Playboy since the laws were so strict.

Spencer

My understanding of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) ("legalizing" homosexual sex between consenting adults in private) is that the private possession of pornography is -- in principle -- as protected as sex acts between consenting adults.

From the admittedly nauseating New Age type touchy-feely language of Justice Kennedy's majority opinion (nicely lampooned by Justice Scalia in his stinging dissent):

Quote
Liberty protects the person from unwarranted government intrusions into a dwelling or other private places. In our tradition the State is not omnipresent in the home. And there are other spheres of our lives and existence, outside the home, where the State should not be a dominant presence. Freedom extends beyond spatial bounds. Liberty presumes an autonomy of self that includes freedom of thought, belief, expression, and certain intimate conduct. The instant case involves liberty of the person both in its spatial and more transcendent dimensions.

***

The policy of punishing consenting adults for private acts was not much discussed in the early legal literature. We can infer that one reason for this was the very private nature of the conduct.

The decision in Lawrence relies on Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) (invalidating a state law prohibiting the use and possession of contraceptives and counseling as to the use of contraceptives because it violated the privacy of the marital bedroom) and Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972) (invalidating a law against providing contraceptives to unmarried persons).

It looks like the police were investigating "obscene" phone calls -- how they got to pornography and a search warrant is beyond my limited mind's comprehension.

Forastero

Quote from: lildog on October 11, 2006, 01:29 PM NHFT
Quote from: estoves on October 07, 2006, 04:05 AM NHFT
Why do they do porn raids?
Porn isn't ilegal or was it childporn they were looking for.

There are comunities that have local decency laws.  A friend of mine from college who was a real perv moved south and couldn't get over the fact he couldn't even find a place that sold Playboy since the laws were so strict.

That's messed up.