Woman, 92, Dies in Shootout With Police (Drug Bust Wrong House?)

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/21/D8LHSRR01.html

A 92-year-old woman was shot to death Tuesday after she fired at three narcotics officers trying to serve a warrant at her house, officials said.

Neighbors and relatives said it must have been a case of mistaken identity. Police said they had the right address.

Police said the woman, whose name was not released, was the only person home at the time, and had lived there for about 17 years.

As the plainclothes Atlanta police officers approached the house about 7 p.m., a woman inside started shooting, striking each of them, said Officer Joe Cobb, a police spokesman. One was hit in the arm, another in a thigh and the third in a shoulder.

On edit from local news.

http://www.wxia.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=87993

This was supposed to be the routine serving of a search warrant, but things went very wrong, very fast. Once the gunfire ended, three APD narcotics officers had been shot: one with a graze-wound to the face, and another hit dead-on, center of mass in the bulletproof vest. They were all transported to Grady Memorial Hospital with non-life threatening injuries.

<snip>

“The female victim shot and wounded all three of them (the officers),” said deputy police chief Allen Dreher. “The investigation is going to be ongoing -- I’d say it would be all wrapped up in a period of time, but as we have it, she opened fire on the officers. The officers returned fire, struck and killed her.”

Johnston’s relatives arrived at the scene of the shootout, distraught and upset. The warrant was served at Johnson’s home at 933 Neal Street. The victim’s family says they are convinced the police made a mistake and went to the wrong house.

“They done the wrong house,” said Johnson’s niece, Sarah Dozier. “And they killed her! This lady lived to be 92. She lived to be 92 and in good health. They went in there and she was scared to death.”

According to family members, Johnson lived alone. Dozier says that Johnson did have a firearm. She says she took her aunt to get a permit for that firearm, for her own protection.

[MadMaddie]

1. She had a right to protect her home from intruders she didn't

know...these kind of mistakes are unacceptable....

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saigon68]

22. THOSE COP THUGS LOVE TO SMOKE THE PERP

I wonder if she was black?

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saigon68]

36. Yes it's looking that way

Being old = Useless

[saigon68]

53. She's Black alright

All Cops know blacks "do dope"


http://www.wxia.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=87993

[sweetheart]

122. northwest atlanta

Republican state, racism strong beneath the surface, drugs war raging as the
new racism, and this woman has survived it all, from Martin Luther King, to
Rodney King, she's lived under a racist bunch of not dead yet, but still
flamingly racist people, who deliberately perpetuate the drugs war as
a way to extend racism, knowing the war has pushed crack further in to black
neighborhoods rolling back any social progress whatsoever.

She's seen it all, the marijuana tax act, the entire drugs war ramp up during
her lifetime, 2 world wars where she contributed to the economy and gosh,
a noble civilian from the underclass has been murdered by the police state,
in a very racist area, in a very racist state, and the whole world has lost
a good regular person, another woman killed by american death squads
roaming at home and abroad, killing with impunity from columbia to Atlanta by
the paper lies of a drugs war. And what is the drugs war, but a war on the
poor, and the weakest, who are punished for not affording proper lawyers or
having to live in bad neighborhoods of racist cops and drug dealing, all
foisted upon this woman during her lifetime by the police state, who traded
the old racism that MLK protested to the new racism that snoop doggy dog
protests.

I can't believe the police don't know how to enter a house without waking
people up. And if people were awake, i can't believe the police were
that stupid to not enter at six am.

[cigsandcoffee]

65. Your post is disgusting.

"too bad she did not take down one of her killers"

Are you fucking kidding me? Without having a clue what happened there beyond a vaguely worded article, you're expressing regret that at least one of the three cops who were shot didn't die?

I hope you're just too young to know any better. Good Lord.

[sweetheart]

68. The cops murdered her

I hope she took down one of her criminal murderers,
cops kill lots of people and get away with it,
oh, i guess its' ok, because they stole the taxes from the slaves
to pay for a bunch of murderers to go around killing old ladies.

The police and the system are completely corrupt. It was murder by the state,
and they will be exhonorated because she's black, just like rodney king.

[cigsandcoffee]

70. You know this how?

Did we read the same article?

[sweetheart]

71. is she dead?

Did you read the same article?

[cigsandcoffee]

73. Yes, she is. Considering that three cops were shot...

...I think it's more than reasonable to wait for more evidence to emerge to find out whether or not those cops were justified in returning fire.

Because she's dead does not mean she was murdered anymore than any criminal who opens fire on police. One would have to be a very hateful person to cast murder accusations (and a death wish) against cops based on the scattered information in that article. Hateful and closed-minded.

I rarely use the ignore list, but I think this is a good time. Your hateful attitude and gross pre-judging gives me the creeps.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Megahurtz]

124. Too many Cops KILL PEOPLE AND GET AWAY WITH IT!

You got that right on!

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

105. allow me to join you

I'm quite appalled at the entire thread.

The cops in question were acting on a WARRANT. A warrant is issued by a judge, upon the presentation of evidence to justify a search -- that being the mechanism by which the right against searches, protected by things like the US and Cdn constitutions, is given effect. This was not some arbitrary decision by some rogue cops to go bust down some old lady's door.

If the information on which the warrant was issued was false or deceptive, it was not likely the fault of the cops who attempted to execute it.

I very certainly do not know enough to express any theories about what happened, any more than anyone else here. But I'm open to the possibility that we have here an elderly woman who was being exploited by a young male family member who used her home for drug transactions. In that case, whether she knew about it or not, there likely would have been little she could have done about it (no, I don't really expect aunties / grandmothers to call the cops on their nephews / grandsons; and people in that position sometimes are intimidated / terrorized). She might even have been at risk from such a young man's associates. It's not like such things do not occur.

Am I saying that's what happened? Not on your nelly. I'm saying it's as credible as some of the shit that's been spewed in this thread.

[teryang]

110. I believe Supreme Court dispensed with knock and announce

...rule. This used to be required even with a warrant. It was a prudent safeguard meant to prevent this kind of trajedy.

Any professional LEO would have the foresight to anticipate this problem in advance. What's more important? Protecting the innocent or getting the suprise bust?

I also heard from more than one source that the officers were not in identifiable attire.

I had a case recently where officers walked up to a vehicle with no probable cause (except for the crime of black males driving in public)in civil attire with black vests that had police marked in large letters on the back but only in small half inch letters across the right breast pocket. This was at 2:00 am. The officers who customarily work undercover had weapons in hand. The female officer had orange dyed hair as I recall. The car sped away believing they were in serious danger. An marked car uninvolved in the stop, allegedly, gave chase. The speeds reached over 70 mph on city streets allegedly caused the officers to give up the chase. A serious accident involving innocent people occurred about two miles from where the officers began the chase. 1st degree fleeing and eluding. Max sentence 30 years. Initially, I would have fled under the same circumstances.

[iverglas]

114. not my point

I'll try again.

These were not rogue cops bashing around a neighbourhood.

As MADem pointed out below as well, they had a warrant, and the warrant was issued by a judge, after a prosecutor reviewed the police evidence and applied to a court for a warrant.

The rules governing the execution of warrants were not made by the cops in question.

This situation appears to be very dissimilar from your case where the police walked up to a car etc. They had a reason for entering that house, which reason had been reviewed by a prosecutor and examined by a judge.

I have absolutely no doubt that there are systemic problems everywhere in the US in relation to selective law enforcement based on race and other factors (as there are in Canada, and the world over), and I hold no brief for the US government's war on drugs.

The point here is that the particular police officers in question appear to have no more deserved to be killed than the woman who shot them did. The difference, in terms of what we know, is that we appear to know that they were acting lawfully, and we do not know whether she was acting lawfully -- had a genuine belief that her life was in danger -- or, perhaps, whether her belief that her life was in danger was prompted by something having to do with the fact that her home was being used for drug dealing and not just a generalized fear of crime and criminals.

I agree with this:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/nation/4354985.html

The Rev. Markel Hutchins, a civil rights activist and spokesman for Johnston's family, said he could understand why the elderly woman would arm herself.

"She was afraid," Hutchins said. "This is a horrifying situation in a neighborhood where crime happens often. This incident is a result of a mix-up."

-- the "mix-up" appearing to be on the part of the woman who was killed. An understandable one, very likely, but not a basis for ascribing murderous intent to the police in question.

The article also states:

The officers had gone to the old woman's house with a search warrant after buying drugs from a man there, police said. Dreher would not say how the dealer knew Johnston.

District Attorney Paul Howard said that his office is looking into the shooting but that a preliminary review indicates the officers had a right to search the home.

As I said earlier, I would not be surprised to discover that the woman was a victim of abuse/exploitation resulting in her home being used for drug dealing -- and whatever one thinks of drug laws, the fact is that using an old woman's home for drug dealing would expose her to a high risk of harm and is abuse and exploitation.

I suspect that she was a victim well before the police broke down her door, and we could follow the spiral of victimization far and wide -- if someone was using her home to deal drugs, he was likely poor and black and a victim of the spectrum of disadvantage that comes with that, etc. etc. -- just as we can in the case of many tragic events.

Assigning blame is often a very tricky mathematical game, and the effort is often better spent looking for solutions to problems.

[greccogirl]

130. I suspect that she was a victim well before the police broke down her door, and we could follow the

I suspect you are correct.

[sweetheart]

184. Yes, a victem of stupid voters and evil politicians

They made the drugs laws that don't regulate those drugs, by propping up
the price of illegal drugs the police do a valuable service to the dealers,
but if price is any indicator, street drugs prices suggest that drugs
are in increasing supply... so hmmm, stupid voters can't figure out after
decades of imprisoning their own kids and murdering them with impunity-empowered
police-death squads, all justified on the back of a proliferation caused deliberately
by legislations proposed by evil politicians.

She is a victem of evil politicians and stupid voters, correctamundo.

[Blue in Bama]

112. with all due respect

if you think that cops, especially on teh narco side, play by any rules then you are incrdicbly naive and must have lived an awfully sheltered life. No excuse for shooting a 92 year old granny even if she had half the dope in Bolivia.

[iverglas]

115. blah de blah blah blah

Oh well, I'm too disgusted by your blah blah to bother dignifying it with a response that it would not deserve.

[greccogirl]

128. Oh I see.

So we can pick and choose the laws we wish to obey, and when lawful officers with a warrant come to our homes we are justified in shooting all three of them, but no one is justified in returning fire? You're kidding!

[Blue in Bama]

113. with all due respect

if you think that cops, especially on teh narco side, play by any rules then you are incrdicbly naive and must have lived an awfully sheltered life. No excuse for shooting a 92 year old granny even if she had half the dope in Bolivia.

[iverglas]

116. and it was not worth saying twice, that's for sure.

[Blue in Bama]

160. Hey

Booger off....I'll just say that once.

[Megahurtz]

133. Just remember iverglas....

the Cops in this Country pull dirty shit quite often.
If they make a mistake they lie, cover up, and plant evidence.
I have seen it happen over and over again.
Then they fudge the Police Reports to make themselves look like Saints
and that's all the Newsmedia has to go on.
Seriously there is no comparison whatsoever to the RCMP and city Police in Canada.

Just consider that.

[iverglas]

136. fascinating

And if you have any evidence of anything untoward having happened in this case before the warrant was executed or after the shooting occurred, I'm sure you'll let us know.

Amid all the obnoxious sound and fury in this thread, nobody has managed to do so yet.

[Blue in Bama]

166. I'll let you know

so stay tuned.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

123. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[greccogirl]

127. Ditto.

A lot of comments on this thread are.

[cigsandcoffee]

67. How do you know she's innocent?

She shot three cops. That's certainly enough to leave me (and anyone who is fair-minded) neutral on the subject until knowing more.

[piedmont]

74. she shot three people in civilian dress who knocked down her door...

in a town with a problem of home-invasion robberies, rapes, and murders.

[Doremus]

95. How indeed.

"Police in Atlanta say they had bought drugs in the house of elderly woman who was shot to death Tuesday night.

Officers say a man sold them narcotics in the home Tuesday. But when they returned later to the house, 92-year-old Kathryn Johnston fired on them. The police shot back and killed her.

Police say they did everything right before firing. They say they obtained a warrant, knocked before forcing entry and withheld fire until Johnston shot at them."
http://www.newschannel5.tv/News/Other/4844/

[sweetheart]

121. because she lived to be 92

Only the innocent live that long in our world mate.

[Crayson]

195. as far as I'm concerned...

... she shot three *INDIVIDUALS* breaking and entering her home.

Specially those older people are used to UNIFORMED officers.
Plaincloth police probaly never ever came to her mind.

[greccogirl]

61. Intruders? Since when are police with a search

warrant intruders?

[piedmont]

66. Since they bust down doors without knocking

especially in a town with a problem of home invasion robberies and rapes.

[greccogirl]

131. And you have proof that they "busted" down the

door without knocking?

[benEzra]

147. See the latest news story downthread. This was a no-knock warrant,

not a "knock and announce."

[struggle4progress]

151. Officials admit it:

GA police: Man sold drugs at home where elderly woman was killed

... Assistant Atlanta Police Chief Alan Dreher said Wednesday that ... that after police ... knocked down the woman's door, she opened fire and injured three officers ...

http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=3584772

[greccogirl]

157. And they had a no knock warrant.

[piedmont]

165. Yeah, and the SS had warrants for the Jews...

it's still wrong. "But, But, they were just following orders!"

[lakercub]

96. when they knock down the door

and are in PLAIN-CLOTHES!!!! How the hell do plain-clothes cops do no-knock warrant searches. That is too stupid for words.

I don't own a gun, and hopefully never will, but if I did, and someone knocked down my door in regular clothes I believe I might be inclined to open fire. They could scream police until they are blue in the face, but no visible badge or uniform? You take your chances and deserve what you get.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

2. as they "approached" her house?

or as they kicked the door in?

there is no way a 90 year old woman could hit 3 moving targets unless they were all bunched up in one spot, say... in her doorway.

[marshall]

18. I caught that too

First the officers are described as "approaching the house" and then the niece says they kicked the door down. I want to know if they kicked the door down before or after the woman shot them. If it was before then I would call it more than simply an "approach" and the woman was justified in shooting.

[benEzra]

30. I'm sure they didn't kick the door down AFTER she shot them...

so if the door was kicked down, it was probably before she shot them--meaning they were forcibly entering the house (presumably dressed like ordinary drug buyers, NOT police) when they were shot. Waiting for more facts, though.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[longship]

4. Oh, they are going to pay, and pay, and pay BIIIIIG!!

:kick:

[Captain Hilts]

5. Sounds like the clip in her gun was empty when they got her. nt

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lithiumbomb]

7. just to play devil's advocate

This being Atlanta, anything is possible. We had an 80-something lady murder her boyfriend with some shots to the head in the lobby of their old people's home not too long ago. I live in this area and it's conceivable that her address was wrongly, or even correctly, associated with a drug crime even if she had zero knowledge of it herself. Or perhaps she was a drug pusher, though that's extremely unlikely.

Whether or not the officers identified themselves, it seems likely she didn't hear them, or otherwise felt threatened by three plain clothed men coming up to her house, like most of us probably would. Still, something went horribly wrong here. Regardless I'd hate to condemn the officers as "pigs" until an investigation is complete.

[AndyTiedye]

8. If They Had Found Drugs, We Would Have Heard About It!

We can safely assume there was not a trace of drugs in her home,
or the story would have been "92-year-old drug pusher dies in shootout".

[lithiumbomb]

9. well, possibly

However, this only happened 7 hours ago. I doubt they're finished with the crime scene. They probably won't be for some time.

[Crim_n al]

11. It doesn't take them that long to plant false evidence. n/t

[lithiumbomb]

23. or perhaps the house will burn down

Anything is possible of course. But there's not a history of planting drugs on 92 year old ladies around here...

This is going to be a _very_ high profile incident. There's surely going to be lawsuits. There will definitely be a microscope over this incident and hopefully they'll figure out what happened so that this doesn't happen again.

FWIW, no updates from the morning paper. I'd expect nothing new until the 5pm local news cycle.

[greccogirl]

132. Please explain what

"false" evidence was planted to get the warrant?

[SemperEadem]

193. not necessarily

the part about a 90 something yr old woman wounding 3 police officers is far more 'sexy' than the part about them finding or not finding any drugs in the home--'sexy' is what gets airtime in news, not facts.

[Pacifist Patriot]

27. Atlanta native here who can't disagree with you.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Crim_n al]

12. Guess they thought she was using medical marijuana.

This whole criminalisation of marijuana use has been idiotic from the start.

Marijuana has always had medical uses, and more information comes out on its
health benefits each year, but people using it are still treated in the same
way as rapists and murderers.

[Ian David]

20. Medical Marijuana was going to be my guess, too.

That is, if it wasn't a wrong address.

Either way, it's a shame and a waste.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[greccogirl]

143. Since cops are

basically "lazy"? Really? What proof do you have of this?

[greccogirl]

62. How do you know they DIDN'T knock?

It doesn't sound like they got the chance!

[zreosumgame]

84. looks like they were macho men after an old lady

"My aunt was in good health. I'm sure she panicked when they kicked that door down," Dozier said. "There was no reason they had to go in there and shoot her down like a dog."

[greccogirl]

125. Look - they had a warrant. I haven't read anything about

"kicking in the door". She shot all three of them!

[piedmont]

172. they did force the door open-- exactly as a home invasion would happen.

http://www.11alive.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=88037
from the article:
Dreher says the police had a "no knock" warrant, meaning just that -- they did not have to knock before entering. But Dreher added his officers did announce themselves before pushing in Johnston's front door.


I wonder how loudly they announced themselves or how much time they gave before kicking in the door. They didn't have to give ANY time. We need to do away with this "no-knock" bullshit-- it risks lives and needlessly terrorizes people.

[krispos42]

13. I tried to look at the local paper, but they want me to register

Screw that. Like I need more people knowing my email address.

[Ian David]

21. You can get a Login from www.BugMeNot.com n/t

[krispos42]

41. Sweet!

:yourock:

[flamingpie2500]

15. what the hell is a 92 year old woman doing with a gun?????

for her protection? The odds of her shooting someone innocent are a lot higher than her shooting a criminal.

[Vinca]

16. Depends on where she lived.

If it's a drug ridden, high crime neighborhood, it might well have been a burglar busting down the door. She had to protect herself and, IMHO as a former cop, her shoot was justified. The cops apparently did make a huge mistake by busting down the door of the wrong house. I don't know if they should be criminally charged, but the lawyers will be lining up around the block for the surviving family members.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saigon68]

25. If someone was busting in most doors around where I live

They would have gotten a "Suitable Greeting"

LOL

[Tempest]

28. Your statement is false

"if she wouldn't have had a gun--she would be alive today."

Tell that to the more than 500 victims of wrong house drug raids who were killed by police when they didn't have a gun.

Tell that to the 13 year old boy who was SHOT IN THE BACK WHILE LYING ON HIS STOMACH by the police.

[lakercub]

97. Sounds to me like she could protect herself

She hit all three of them. Whatever you think about this incident, we do know she knew how to handle the gun.

[Richard Steele]

183. QUOTE: "but at 92, ALL people are criminals." What does that even mean?

:silly:

[Cozumel]

17. Well stated.

And I come from the state of FL. Where if you're 105, can't walk and can't see, don't worry, we won't take away your driver's license. I definately wouldn't want to see someone that age with a gun. on the other hand, i'm not defending the cops, but not all cops are assholes. some of em are just people doing their jobs. not all cops are power hungry authoratative pricks, some are actually good people. in my town, most aren't too bad. however, a 15 min drive to the beach will get you the worst cops you've ever seen. pull you over for whatever they feel--they pulled my buddy over for a SLIGHT swerve while he changed the cd track (he didn't even leave his lane). now i'm just ranting, but the point is, i'd be interested to see how this all plays out, but i have a strange feeling that the cops were maybe right in this situation. who knows how paranoid this old woman was. but also, who knows how over-zealous these cops are as well...

[benEzra]

31. Care to back that up?

Not everyone who is 92 is a blundering dunderhead (I dare say most aren't), ignorant stereotypes to the contrary. She was apparently quite competent with a firearm, she lived in a rough neighborhood, and IIRC a 72-year-old neighbor had recently been raped.

My great-grandmother is in her '90s and is SUPREMELY competent in everything she does. I don't know if she owns a firearm, but if she did, I know she'd be responsible with it.

The irresponsible action here was that 3 tough-looking guys apparently dressed as drug buyers (undercover) kicked in a woman's door apparently based on an uncorroborated tip from an anonymous informant. THAT egregious failure of due diligence will lead to a huge lawsuit by the victim's survivors, and hopefully will lead to reforms of the APD's standard operating procedures.

Most departments DO NOT ALLOW officers not in uniform to perform traffic stops, do raids, etc. for precisely this reason--the high, forseeable likelihood of mistaken identity.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

39. Well, it's true for all ages.

Guns are more likely to shoot an innocent person than in self defense for young and old.

[davepc]

42. sez who?

just curious.

[flamingpie2500]

48. sorry, but someone in their 90's is NOT as competent as they are in their

30's or 40's. Let's just arm teenagers while we are at it.
Hell, let's not stop there. Let's arm ANYONE who can handle a gun and know that killing is wrong. Say, at 8 years old--they certainly need to be able to defend themselves.
Go ahead and get your great grandmother a gun--see how well you sleep at night--just be sure you call before you come to visit.

[benEzra]

56. There is absolutely no reason to believe she was incompetent...

and the negligence of the Atlanta police department is there for all to see. Most departments PROHIBIT traffic stops or raids by nonuniformed officers, for the obvious reasons.

The homeowner here was the VICTIM of the incompetents who decided to stage an ill-planned no-knock raid. There is no indication that the victim herself was incompetent.

[Greyskye]

34. A 72 year old woman in the neighborhood had been raped

And she was worried about her safty. A relative had taken her to get her permit. And I wouldn't be surprised if she had spent some time on a range - here is a quote from one of the articles that has been linked:

Once the gunfire ended, three APD narcotics officers had been shot: one with a graze-wound to the face, and another hit dead-on, center of mass in the bulletproof vest.

[anotherdrew]

47. her share n/t

[lynne]

24. She was 92 and managed to pop three officers -

- and they are at fault for defending themselves? I doubt they had time to check her birth certificate while dodging bullets. If someone is waiting at the door loaded to the teeth for the police to arrive - it sounds to me like they are protecting something or somebody. I have doubts that this was the wrong house - possibly she was protecting a family member.

[saigon68]

26. Apparently her niece didn't think so

Sarah Dozier, identified as a niece of the woman, told WAGA-TV that there were never any drugs at the house.

"My aunt was in good health. I'm sure she panicked when they kicked that door down," Dozier said. "There was no reason they had to go in there and shoot her down like a dog."

[benEzra]

32. A 72-year-old neighbor had recently been raped at home,

as I recall. This was a bad neighborhood, and she had bars on her windows and a single OLD pistol for protection. She was not armed to the teeth by any stretch of the imagination--and she was the only person in the house.

The police received an anonymous tip that a drug dealer lived at such-and-such an address. The department sent three officers presumably dressed as drug buyers (undercover) to serve the warrant--which was unquestionably negligent--and for whatever reason, they allegedly end up kicking in the door like criminals. After the shooting stopped, they found out their hastily served raid based on uncorroborated, anonymous intel had killed a 92-year-old woman.

This incident was an EGREGIOUS failure of due diligence on the part of the department, and they will likely get their asses sued off. Hopefully that will result in some reforms of departmental policy.

[uncle ray]

35. it's her right to protect her property.

it doesn't matter what she was defending. when you send cops out in plain clothes to bust peoples doors down without announcing themselves as police, police are going to get shot. yet you blame the victim, she MUST have been doing something wrong to have a gun, right?:eyes: you try to make it sound like she was just waiting for someone to shoot. more likely she was sitting in her chair knitting or reading, heard/seen the commotion of several men gathering on her doorstep, picked up the gun that was on the table next to her for protection, and was ready when they busted in.

i'm getting sick of this bullshit with the police getting carried away with their use of deadly force, and even the non-deadly force that STILL manages to kill innocent people. the way i see it, police are there to protect us, to be in the line of fire while enforcing the law. i would rather ten police get killed in the line of duty than one innocent person. if they died while protecting innocent lives, as they should be, then they deserve to be honored as heroes. when they get shot while dressed in plainclothes while kicking in doors, then they are cowards, no better than the criminals they claim to be pursuing. i would have sympathy for the officers if they had been in uniform and identified themselves verbally. but they were not and did not.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Paladin]

49. Yeah, And There Are Other Forums.....

...for cop haters like you. Try the Gun Dungeon, you'll have plenty of company.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[piedmont]

79. ad hominem

would it add anything to the discussion to tell you that there are other forums (Free Republic, for one) for police-state defenders like you?

[Paladin]

99. "Police-State Defenders Like You"

Look who's talking about ad hominems.....

[piedmont]

180. If you object to it, then don't do it. nt

[Paladin]

194. Take Your Own Advice

n/t

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

185. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[greccogirl]

144. They DID annouce themselves.

You have no right to shoot any police officer with a warrant to "protect" your property!!

[lakercub]

174. You are missing (repeatedly)

a key point. They were in plain clothes. How does she know they were cops? Because they said so? That's beyond stupid. It is not unknown in high crime neighborhoods (or any neighborhoods for that matter) for criminals to say "police" and trick a victim into opening a door. Then they kicked her door down. You are ninety-two, living in a high-crime area, and someone kicks down your door. Opening fire is completely logical and reasonable when trying to protect self and home. She has no proof they are police aside from the fact that they might have said "police, open up." That isn't good enough by any stretch of the imagination. Also, since this was a no-knock warrant, one has to wonder whether they actually announced themselves or not. That kind of defeats the purpose of a no-knock warrant.

This is solely and completely the fault of the officers who showed up to the door in plain clothes. A no-knock warrant with plain clothes cops is simply begging for trouble...and that is what happened. These officers should have been in full uniform with badges clearly visible. That can still be faked, but at least one could reasonably assume the people at the door are cops.

[High Plains]

37. They are at fault for kicking her door down and charging in.

What would you have done in that circumstance?

We have a real issue with overzealous law enforcement in this country, and incidents like this are the result.

[krispos42]

50. The problem is that both sides are right

The police were serving a warrant when they came under fire. That, to them, justifies the suspicion of the suspects they are investigating. That the house they were investigating was possibly either incorrectly printed on the warrant or the result of a unsubstantiated rumor was not something they knew at the time, nor could reasonably expected to know. To them, the worst-case scenario was happening in front of them.

The lady, apparently unaware that it was the police at the door or unwilling to believe that without seeing badges. And when they kicked the door in, she defended herself.

All four individuals were right in what they did.

What is screwed up is that the police were not in uniform and did not exercise restraint in identifying themselves to the owner and occupier of the home. And that a warrant was issued in the first place on such obviously incorrect testimony.

[greccogirl]

134. I just love the stuff

I'm reading on this thread. I'm so glad my nephew is no longer a cop...........

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

38. If this woman didn't want to get shot...

She shouldn't have been in her house.

Apparently. According to the logic of some in the UCLA thread.

[greccogirl]

145. No if she didn't want to get

shot she shouldn't have shot three police officers, plain and simple.

[RamboLiberal]

43. Looks like some idiot was using her house for drugs sales

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/10374909/detail.html

Atlanta Police Asst. Chief Alan Dreher said at a news conference Wednesday that an undercover officer made a drug purchase at Johnston’s address late Tuesday afternoon from a male suspect. Officers were able to obtain a search warrant after that.

Asst. Chief Dreher said as they were executing the search warrant, the officers announced themselves and then forced open the door. Officials say the warrant was a “No Knock” warrant – meaning that the officers did not knock before forcing open the door, but they did announce themselves.

Dreher said as soon as the officers forced open the door, Johnston shot at the officers and the officers returned fire to protect themselves. One officer was shot 3 times – once in the leg, on the side of the face and once in his bulletproof vest. One officer was hit in the leg and another hit in their arm. All officers are on paid administrative leave pending an investigation – as is common.

Officials say they have not made any arrests in the case and they have not located the male suspect. Dreher said suspected narcotics were recovered from the home but they are awaiting lab results to confirm the items are drugs.

Dreher said a marked patrol vehicle was parked in front of the residence and the word “Police” was written across the front and back of the narcotics team’s vests. He also said only a matter of minutes passed between when officers arrived on the scene and when they forced open the door.

[ItNerd4life]

44. I'm disheartened by some of the anti-police rhetoric posted by others.

Thanks for the update. It's nice to hear they were doing their jobs (as I suspected).

I have many friends who are police officers, some are/were narc officers. The crap they put up with isn't something I could do.

[lithiumbomb]

52. me as well

Obviously this didn't have to happen, something in the system (either policy, procedure, information, etc.) failed and a tragic sequence of events unfolded. If the officers are at fault, I hope they are held accountable.

However, the attitude by some that all officers are violence happy murderers, and/or that it's a good thing the officers were shot, is appaling. I live about a mile from this lady's house. Some neighborhoods in this part of the city are decent, some are downright dangerous. She lives in a dangerous one. There is most certainly not a rash of narcotics officers breaking in to random people's homes, killing them, and planting drugs. It's just not happening. Perhaps in the movies or TV, or other cities, but not in mine. All the officers around here that I have dealt with are very professional, doing a thankless and dangerous job, protecting my property and safety (my girlfriend had her car stereo stolen a week ago, and has gotten four calls from the responding officer to make sure everything is ok). Let's wait until an investigation is complete before we judge the officers in this incident.

The bad cops are the ones that make the news because it's a sensational abuse of power. The good cops are the ones we never hear about. Let's not mix the two up.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NashVegas]

55. No Knock Warrants

There was a story last year, in Alabama(?) where something similar happened. Police went to the wrong house for a drug bust and were shot at.

No knock warrants are starting to look like they're just as dangerous for police as they are for arrestees. Is it really worth it for silly drug laws?

[piedmont]

82. yeah, they were doing jobs-- if their job description was TERRORIST

They knocked down the door of an old lady's house at night in a neighborhood and city that has a violent crime problem. And what else could they have expected?

[greccogirl]

139. Er, not to be shot I would imagine.

[piedmont]

168. If it were my job not to be shot, I wouldn't imitate a home invasion. nt

[greccogirl]

170. It was a lawful police

action - they had a WARRANT. Not a home invasion or robbery.

[piedmont]

177. Nazi SS had warrants-- that doesn't make it right.

If you don't want to get shot, then don't make your serving of a warrant look exactly like a home invasion. What are people to do now if someone beats down their door yelling "police?" Anyone can yell "police"-- if you shoot back and it is the police, you're probably gonna die. If you don't and it's an actual home invasion, you may also die. This bullshit just makes it harder for people to protect themselves.

[lakercub]

101. Doing your job can be stupid

If you are a plain-clothes cop doing a no-knock search, knocking doors down, you run an incredibly high risk of getting shot, and, much as I hate guns, deservedly so. People have a right to protect their property, and if an officer is not in uniform with a visible badge, the home-owner has no reason to believe the person is a cop.

If someone knocks down your door, you will be frightened. If that person has no uniform, you can....and should...expect someone terrible just broke into your house. From that point on, everything you do for your own protection is completely, 100 percent, and undeniably within your rights and totally justifiable.

"It's nice to hear they were doing their jobs (as I suspected)."

They may have been doing their jobs, but that doesn't make it nice to hear. If your job puts you in an absurd situation like this (in fact, is LIKELY to put you in an absurd situation like this) you don't do the job...you get a new one. That is not anti-cop, it is anti-cop stupidity. Much of what the police do I support and admire, but there are plenty of things going on in police departments that need to stop.
If I was a cop, and my sergeant, captain, whoever, said I was going on a no-knock raid in plain-clothes, I would tell him to go to hell.

Stuff like this invites scorn and police ridicule. In fact it is deserving of scorn and ridicule. Each of the three officers who got shot is a moron for ever putting themselves in this situation.

[High Plains]

119. Gee, why would anybody be anti-police?

Could it be the 1.6 million non-violent drug offenders arrested each year? The 900,000 marijuana arrests, 90% of which were for simple possession? Could it be the heavy-handed thuggery that is all too evident in police forces across the land?

Anybody who is a narc is not my friend and never will be. Their job depends on the human rights violation of arresting and jailing people who aren't doing anything to anyone. And too many of them really, really like their job. Fuck them.

[Name removed]

187. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

186. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saigon68]

190. Straw man response

Sure your police friends are heroes

These thugs are MURDERERS

BESIDES THESE GUYS LOVED their jobs

Too bad the old lady was "out gunned'

[Scout]

45. thanks for the update, this thread really needed it. n/t

[benEzra]

60. In her house, or on her property, I wonder? (n/t)

[Jose Diablo]

100. More likely, some idiot got busted and to avoid prosecution

he gave her address just to make a deal, the cops can use even an unreliable "witness" to get a warrant. So they did and a narc bust being what it is, smash the door in and rush to prevent the perps from disposing the drugs before they can be seized, the result is what we see happened.

This war on drugs is a bad idea. Not that drugs are good, it's just the solution is worse than the disease. We need a more sane approach to the drug war. It doesn't help that the CIA uses drug transportation to make money to support their agendas.

The war on drugs puts the cops in impossible situations, plus there are corruption factors because there is so much money in drugs. We'd be better off spending the money spent on drug enforcement on community projects to get the youth in jobs. Thats what those drug plagued communities really need, is jobs so young people can make a living. Plus, the profit needs to be taken out of drugs. The reason drugs are so profitable, is because it's a smuggled/illegal commodity.

It's a case where the company is working at cross-purposes with the wellbeing of communities here, in America.

[Crim_n al]

104. The war on drugs is working perfectly.

It keeps the prices up, which makes it worthwhile for the pushers to keep getting new people addicted,
and gives the CIA an excuse to kill any rivals who try to edge in on the supply side.

We're not encouraging poppy growth in Afghanistan for nothing, you know.

[greccogirl]

149. More than likely

it was a relative.

[greccogirl]

135. Sounds about what I expected.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the old lady was afraid of the person who obviously had drugs in her home and HIS friends. The cops announced themselves and came in. She had no right to shoot the cops.

[Recursion]

159. Yeah, robbers *never* impersonate police

And police never abuse their authority.

[greccogirl]

173. What was abusive

about this? They had a no knock WARRANT. They announced themselves and went in. All lawful and done according to training.

Do you really think police should knock, announce themselves and stand there and wait to be killed? They almost were anyway.

[struggle4progress]

148. Neighbors find this claim incredible:

Neighbors React To Elderly Woman's Death
POSTED: 5:22 pm EST November 22, 2006
UPDATED: 6:51 pm EST November 22, 2006

... Atlanta Police say there was an undercover drug buy at Johnston’s Neal Street home from a male who has not yet been located. People who live nearby, say no way.

“Never. Never – this was a 92-year-old lady who lives by herself, she don’t know no young folks like that,” said neighbor Tony Terrance.

When Atlanta Police broke down Johnston’s door, investigators say the elderly woman started shooting and they had to return fire to protect themselves ...

Rev. Hutchins said he had heard from people in the community that there was drug activity in the neighborhood, but never at Johnston’s home ...

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/10382628/detail.html

[catmandu57]

54. These weren't police, they were thug narcs

renegades, the kind you see on abc and fox, we don't need police like this.

If she hadn't shot them, say she had a baseball bat or something, at the very least she would've been thrown face first to the floor, handcuffed, screamed and cursed at, all the while watching her home being destroyed.

This fucking war on American citizens must stop, this kicking in of doors, killing people, hurting people is outrageous.

[Ezlivin]

58. Gun control means hitting your target

Did the elderly woman do a drop and roll to fire off her three rounds?

Hell, she's better at handling her gun than most people. Did she just come back from her fifth tour of duty in Iraq?

The War on Drugs is actually a war on anyone who is in the way, even if they are old and in the way.

[saigon68]

77. A little "Double tap" would have been the ticket

I wonder

HOW MANY TIMES THE COPS SHOT HER???


10 15 OR MORE?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_tap


Double tap or DT is the tactical shooting technique of pulling the trigger of a weapon (preferably a pistol) twice in quick succession to deliver two shots to the same target zone. The technique ensures both hit and damage effects while keeping recoil to a minimum and thus maintaining accuracy. The gunshots are made in clusters, about one inch apart, resulting in a large and very painful wound that leads to the quick death of a target. It is used mainly in close-quarter (urban) scenarios in both police and military situations, by SWAT teams, Special Police, Special Forces, and conventional military forces.

[piedmont]

80. the answer to that question may bankrupt APD-- I hope it does.

[One_Life_To_Give]

59. Shades of Ruby Ridge and WACO?

This sounds like another case where a little footwork. Checking out the information would have gone a long way in preventing this tragedy. But I guess we can't be bothered to learn from ours and others mistakes.

[benEzra]

63. OK, so this was NOT a "knock and announce," it was a NO-KNOCK...

per this update, posted upthread (thanks to RamboLiberal for the additional info).

This scenario is PRECISELY why the FBI has said in the past that no-knocks should NOT be routinely used:

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/1997/may976.htm

UNDERLYING RATIONALE FOR KNOCK AND ANNOUNCE

The Supreme Court has determined that "every householder, the good and the bad, the guilty and the innocent, is entitled to the protection designed to secure the common interest against unlawful invasion of the house."19 The knock and announce rule provides citizens with psychological security, knowing that one need not fear an unexpected intrusion. Privacy interests also are protected, avoiding unnecessary embarrassment, shock, or property damage resulting from an unannounced entry.

The rule serves to protect both the individual citizen and the police from the risk of harm and the potential for violence that may occur as a result of an unannounced entry.20 Announcement protects officers by ensuring that they are not "mistaken for prowlers and shot down by a fearful householder."21 Innocent citizens also are protected from law enforcement officers who mistakenly might shoot armed occupants who merely are trying to defend themselves from who they preceive to be armed intruders.

I think there will be a lot of people asking why the police department decided to serve a no-knock warrant on a 92-year-old woman, and whether the intel (drug buy from someone else rooming in her house? someone standing on her porch? someone standing on her sidewalk?). I guess she, and her right to see a warrant before having her house searched, is just one of those necessary casualties of the War on Non-Approved Herbs. :eyes:

The fact that it turns out to have been a no-knock reminds me of this case:

http://www.november.org/razorwire/rzold/16/16012.html

I predict a very large lawsuit by her survivors, and a thorough review of Atlanta PD "no-knock" issue policies.

[Superman Returns]

64. this thread

makes the bad stereotypes of certain liberals come true. wishing that she would have killed a cop or calling them pigs is disgusting. Last time I checked, if police officers have a warrant you don't have a right to shoot at them. Yeah, I'll be a "cop apologist."

[benEzra]

69. The problem is,

if they stage it as a no-knock, as in this case, how do you know that it's the police?

That is why the FBI has said that no-knocks should be used ONLY in special circumstances--and why, IMO, "knock and announce" warrants should give the homeowner enough time to identify the people at her/his door as bona fide police officers.

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/1997/may976.htm

The (knock and announce) rule serves to protect both the individual citizen and the police from the risk of harm and the potential for violence that may occur as a result of an unannounced entry.20 Announcement protects officers by ensuring that they are not "mistaken for prowlers and shot down by a fearful householder."21 Innocent citizens also are protected from law enforcement officers who mistakenly might shoot armed occupants who merely are trying to defend themselves from who they preceive to be armed intruders.

In the long run, casual use of no-knocks endanger both citizens AND the police.

[greccogirl]

137. Well by all means then

when a policeman comes to your door and announces and then comes in, you should shoot them. (rolls eyes).

[benEzra]

164. No, that's not what people are saying at all...

I read most of these responses as saying that the police should act like the POLICE, not like somebody staging a home-invasion robbery or somesuch, unless there is a compelling reason (known violent criminal, etc.). The Fourth Amendment does not have a "drug accusation" exemption.

You appear to be saying that this woman would have opened the door and shot the police if they announced themselves properly, hence they needed to do a violent entry. I say, she shot the police because she thought they WEREN'T police, because they didn't ACT like police. Because the warrant they were told to serve was inexplicably a no-knock.

[greccogirl]

169. Sorry I don't buy it.

The cops announced themselves - and were wearing police jackets. There is no way she could have not known they were police - I don't blame them for acting in self defense.

By the way on the news it said that the warrant WAS for the correct address.

[lakercub]

178. You are amazing

You have missed this about ten times. If they are in plain clothes...you have no idea whether they or cops or not. Just because they say so means nothing. They did this in plain clothes. That, all by itself, makes this their fault. If you cannot be easily identified as police, then you can expect to get shot when you break down someone's door. You damn near deserve to be shot for being so stupid.

What they did was legal. But it sure was dumb. Plain clothes cops on no-knock raids get killed. This practice must stop for the safety of the police.

[daleo]

72. She must have had quite good reflexes and eyesight

Not many people do at that advanced age.

Leaving aside the ethics of the police breaking down the door for a moment, should one shooter have been able to shoot all three cops? It seems to me that police tactics ought to be designed to prevent such a thing. So, a lot of things must have gone wrong in this case.

Back to the matter of police ethics - this is what properly served warrants are meant to prevent.

[RamboLiberal]

75. A bit more info from AJC

Dreher, in a news conference on Wednesday, said the officers broke through a burglar bar entry door and then a wooden door. The police, whom Dreher called "experienced officers," were not wearing uniforms but had on vests with "police" on the front. He said they were inside the house when they were shot.

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/atlanta/stories/2006/11/21/1121copshot.html


Kathryn Johnston was killed on Tuesday night.

BTW, just having police on your jacket or vest IMHO is not sufficient. In my area a week or two ago there was a home invasion where perps were wearing POLICE on their jackets. I feel bad for people who live in neighborhoods where they have to be scared of the police and the perps.

[greccogirl]

138. Not sufficient? What would

be sufficient?

[davepc]

76. pop quiz:

police or home invaders?


For full effect, make sure you take this quiz in the middle of the night or in the pre-dawn darkness. Also make sure to be awakened from your sleep by the sound of your front/back door being smashed accompanied by numerous voices yelling at the top of their lungs.

Also, they're pointing their guns AT you.



Have fun.

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RamboLiberal]

91. BTW, those gun lights - they are extremely bright and blinding

you can't tell who is behind the light. And the new flashlights a lot of cops carry are the same brightness - much greater than the old mag lights. I don't know if these cops came in the house with gun lights or their bright flashlights, but if they did the old lady wouldn't have been able to see their police jackets. Scared, she could've been shooting towards their lights.

[nini]

83. what cracks me about these kinds of threads

is that everyone assumes the police were excited to go in and take out a 92 year old woman. I'm sure they were loving the idea they were going to take on a 92 year old woman who was alone in her house. :eyes:


This is a tragic story and obviously some bad tips etc.. were given or a tragic mistake made on the address.


I will reserve judgment on the police and the family in that house as to whether or not drugs were being sold until enough info is out there.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

86. According to CNN this afternoon

The Atlanta Police conducted an undercover drug buy at the house earlier in the day. Clearly it wasn't the elderly woman, but probably a relative who was either staying there or using her house because who would suspect her.

[Roy]

107. Either that or the great blue wall is under construction....

To cover the fact that they just gunned down a 92 year old woman defending herself in her own home and to shield against a huge wrongful death lawsuit.

I am wondering why they did not keep the home under surveillance until the mysterious "unknown male suspect" was known to be home. (In a home occupied only by the dead woman)

Doesn't it seem odd that they say they got a warrant and was THEN going to the house in plains clothes to make a drug buy and serve a no knock warrant?
Also, if an under cover police officer bought drugs at the home, couldn't they make an arrest a the time the crime was committed?
And shouldn't the warrant have being issued for the person suspected of the crime of selling drugs and not just a blanket excuse to kick in the door and terrorize any innocents, including children they may be putting at risk by going in armed with fingers on the triggers?

Especially when they don't even know if the suspect actually lived at that address or even in the home at the time. THEY SAY THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO THE PERSON IS THEY BOUGHT THE DRUGS FROM!!!
Looks like they are making it up as they go along to me.

Too many things in this incidence says they are trying to cover their ass but are having to answer questions at the same time.
Some of these answers are conflicting with some of the incidents.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nini]

162. It's not to their advantage to engage in a shootout

sorry, but while there some bad cops - the norm is not to go into a shootout. Those guys want to go home to their families too.

[superconnected]

85. Since she was shooting at the police, I believe they have a right to shoot her.

I've worked at a few police departments. They really aren't the enemy. I notice some people here have called them oinkers just because they are the police. Gee, that's a pretty unsophisticated blanket statment. There are good and bad cops. Most are fine and are doing their job.

If you don't like the job the police do, vote for a different mayor. Typically the mayor controls the police department.

I remember the first day I worked at Edmonds police dept in Edmonds, WA. The cop I was assigned to was sick because he just had to clean up after a fatal traffic accident. I mean pick up the severed body parts, in this case fingers.

Cops do a lot of good. They usually respond to calls. Warrants are issued by judges and it's a tough job serving them because of DUMBSHITS like this lady who want to shoot at anyone who walks up their walk way.

It's unlikely the police were banging down her door on an occasion where they are serving a warrant. Usually they knock. Banging through the door takes a court order, in which case there is usally a good reason brought before a judge to bang down the door first. It isn't just the police deciding they like to break through doors. Generally they don't. It puts them in danger and most have families-kids etc. Hey, I have cops in my family. They like to come home safe to their familys.

This woman was clearly in the wrong. She was shooting at the cops. They should shoot back. Who knows who else she would have shoot. Does she shoot anyone who enters her yard?

Basically I don't see where her getting shot is an issue. I dont' blame the cops a bit. If she didn't want them in her house she could have not answered the door, and called the police dept and told them way. Most precints can get the police officers on the phone who are at a home pretty quick. She however decided to solve it with violence and tried to kill 3 cops. Thank god they took her out.

Btw, it's most likely the door got kicked down when they went in there AFTER she shot at them. Serving a warrant doesn't include kicking down doors.

[RamboLiberal]

87. I'm not knocking the cops - but the AJC story does say

they took down her burglar bars on her door then the wooden door. Now given most 92 year olds are hard of hearing and this was after dark she may have well been scared out of her wits. Story does say they were shot inside the house.

Drug raids are dangerous to the cops but in some cases they are just as dangerous to the citizens.

I'm willing to see how this story plays out before jumping to conclusions.

I will say some people here sound like good old G. Gordon Liddy at his finest.

[superconnected]

93. I didn't read what you read.

what I read was a page snippet so I didn't gather they were shot inside.

[nini]

88. this whole thing is so sad

I agree with you on some of this as the police had to shoot back when shot at.

But, I also think she was obviously very scared at what was going on and felt she was protected herself - which she has a right to do if she feels threatened. Something scared this woman to the point she did what she did - that is what needs to be clarified. I can't imagine how frightened she was to do this.


heartbreaking :cry:

[piedmont]

90. have you read ANY of the info posted about this?

This was plain-clothes agents serving a no-knock warrant. She didn't fire on them in her walkway. She didn't fire on them after answering the door. She fired on them after they knocked her door down without much prior warning. She lives in a city that has had numerous instances of home-invasion robbery. this wasn't the only way for the cops to carry out this warrant.

[superconnected]

94. Have YOU?

I read the the link and you are giving info that isn't in it.

I have to question the accuracy of your additional info.

[RamboLiberal]

98. Read Post 87 - info is there or click this link

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/atlanta/stories/2006/11/21/1121copshot.html

[greccogirl]

150. They had ON police vests.

They announced themselves as police. She shot them in the house. They were executing a legal warrant.

[RamboLiberal]

189. And you expect at 92 a scared old woman sees real well

An article I posted later this evening quotes a neighbor saying the old woman goes to be at 5-6PM. Let's say the house is dark, cops come busting in with their bright weapons mounted or hand held lights, very bright. How great vision do you expect a frightened 90+ year old to have? Think she picked out the POLICE on their vests?

Oh and some home invaders have picked up the trick of using police vests. Had one recently in area I live in.

[Crim_n al]

118. "Thank god they took her out" !!!!! What the hell?????

I can't believe that I'm reading that in a Liberal forum.

And you've got half your "facts" wrong into the bargain.

How would you like someone saying that if it was your much loved great aunt
who was terrorised by plain-clothes intruders bashing her door down just a
week after an acquaintance of hers was raped close by?

In that situation there is no way to know who is coming in, and she was bound
to be afraid it was the rapist coming back for her.

If you're still glad she was shot, I can only hope you go through whatever
you need to go through to teach you what a stupid, evil and ignorant sentiment
that is.

I'll guarantee you don't know the half of what the cops in your family get up
to, if genes have any relation to character.

[oblivious]

120. They also have the right to back off until the situation is clearer.

[Name removed]

129. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[greccogirl]

142. Excellent post - thank you.

My nephew was a cop and you wouldn't believe some of the stuff he experienced during the 9 years he did it. He once pulled a woman over who was doing 95 on the expressway and when he asked her to get out of the car, she got out and kicked him and spit in his face, and called him a pig. He's had kids hyped up on the drugs attack him - the last time it was a 14 year old with a butcher knife who stabbed him twice before he got him under control.

The last straw was when he was attacked by a nut weilding a gun in a bust similar to this one, there was a meth lab in the house (with small children around) and he shot the man before he shot him, six times I believe. He was suspended with pay for the usual "inquiry" and the judge asked him "why did you shoot him six times?" His answer was "because that's all the bullets I had in my gun".

After that he quit. He told me that risking your life every single minute you are on duty for a populace that a great many of view you as the enemy wasn't worth it - and I don't blame him.

What particularly scared him were domestic violence calls. He said in a big majority of cases after the cops were called it wasn't unusual to have the victim of the violence (the girlfriend or wife) attack THEM when they tried to arrest the offender. Having a cop as a family member is very enlightening.

[benEzra]

146. The warrant was a **NO-KNOCK**

which, given the circumstances, was outrageous. No-knocks are NOT supposed to be used routinely, for exactly the reasons you state.

Staging a no-knock raid on a 92-year-old woman who lives alone was outrageous, and that is the department's and the magistrate's fault, not necessarily that of the officers who carried it out.

[greccogirl]

153. What is routine about the bust of a

possible drug dealer, one who had already sold drugs to an undercover cop that day?

[benEzra]

161. That is, indeed, a routine warrant...

warrants issued for suspicion of drug activity are hardly unusual. Did you read the FBI's statement on why using no-knocks casually like this is a bad idea?

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/1997/may976.htm

There are only four circumstances in which no-knocks can legitimately be used, per the courts:

"Apprehension of Peril" exception (i.e., suspect is not only armed, but has used violence in the past and there is strong reason to believe that he will do so again; merely owning a weapon is NOT cause);

"Useless Gesture" exception (i.e., if there's already a standoff going on between the police and the subject of the warrant, knocking is no longer necessary, since the subject knows what's going on; not applicable to this case);

"Destruction of Evidence" exception (i.e., if due to peculiar circumstances, the evidence that is the subject of the warrant could be destroyed in the time it would take to knock-and-announce; often overused, and hardly applicable to this case)

Why they should NOT be used routinely:

UNDERLYING RATIONALE FOR KNOCK AND ANNOUNCE

The Supreme Court has determined that "every householder, the good and the bad, the guilty and the innocent, is entitled to the protection designed to secure the common interest against unlawful invasion of the house."19 The knock and announce rule provides citizens with psychological security, knowing that one need not fear an unexpected intrusion. Privacy interests also are protected, avoiding unnecessary embarrassment, shock, or property damage resulting from an unannounced entry.

The rule serves to protect both the individual citizen and the police from the risk of harm and the potential for violence that may occur as a result of an unannounced entry.20 Announcement protects officers by ensuring that they are not "mistaken for prowlers and shot down by a fearful householder."21 Innocent citizens also are protected from law enforcement officers who mistakenly might shoot armed occupants who merely are trying to defend themselves from who they preceive to be armed intruders.

Paragraph (2) above is the most pertinent to THIS case--which stands as a tragic example of why no-knocks should only be used in rare circumstances.

[greccogirl]

171. So two of those wou ld apply.

Destruction of evidence (drugs) and "apprehension of peril". Very likely you're going to be met with a firearm in using a warrant to arrest. Which is exactly what happened.

[piedmont]

179. So you're in favor of knocking down doors in any drug case?

The mindless drug war continues...

[benEzra]

181. No, you are wrong; you are flatly contradicted by U.S. v. Lucht.

Mere possession of a weapon (particularly lawful possession!) may NOT be used to invoke the apprehension of peril exception in order to allow a no-knock, because nearly half of households own weapons.

You apparently didn't read the FBI report on the case law, so I'll cite it here. From the FBI:

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/1997/may976.htm

Mere knowledge that a suspect has weapons in the house generally is NOT a sufficient justification for an unannounced entry by police. In United States v. Lucht,8 the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that an unannounced entry was illegal because police had no indication that the suspect was violent or inclined to use the weapons that they believed were present in the house.

However, courts are generally sympathetic to police when they have a reasonable belief that the suspect is armed under circumstances indicating danger. For example, the Supreme Court of Florida held that police were justified in invoking the apprehension of peril exception in a murder case where the suspect had committed armed robbery of a deputy and had used a gun or knife in several rapes.9 Here, police not only had knowledge that the suspect possessed weapons inside his premises but also that he had committed a violent crime and had a history of violent behavior.

...

As a general rule, the apprehension of peril exception to the announcement rule applies where police have specific knowledge that a suspect has used a weapon criminally or threatened to use a weapon to avoid arrest. Accordingly, courts have upheld the exception where officers previously were threatened while serving a warrant on the defendant11 and where the suspect had vowed not to return to prison.12

(emphasis added)

So, you are completely wrong; U.S. v. Lucht flatly contradicts your position, and if you tried to get a no-knock on the grounds that the subject owned a gun, you'd be thrown out of the magistrate's office--and such a warrant would be thrown out in court if you did manage to get it. Again, I'd suggest reading the FBI article on the case law; it deals with a lot of these issues.


On the second point--destruction of evidence--the police had absolutely no indication that destruction of evidence was a risk, so it should not have applied, either. Point of fact, the overwhelming majority of drug warrants issued are NOT no-knocks.


Again, case law is very clear that no-knocks are NOT to be used in this type of routine (for police) situation; see the FBI article. No-knocks are reserved for rare and unusual circumstances, and "suspicion of drug activity" is >>NOT<< a rare and unusual circumstance.


And it wasn't the lack of a no-knock that led to a tragic shooting; it was the unjustified USE of a no-knock that led to a tragic shooting. You are saying that a no-knock was justified because it led to a shooting, but that is precisely why no-knocks are NOT justified except in rare circumstances--because they so easily lead to this type of situation. The FBI report specifically said that:

The (knock-and-announce, e.g. ANTI-no-knock) rule serves to protect both the individual citizen AND the police from the risk of harm and the potential for violence that may occur as a result of an unannounced entry.20 Announcement protects officers by ensuring that they are not "mistaken for prowlers and shot down by a fearful householder."21 Innocent citizens also are protected from law enforcement officers who mistakenly might shoot armed occupants who merely are trying to defend themselves from who they preceive to be armed intruders.

(emphasis added)

No-knocks are discouraged precisely because they drastically escalate the risk of a shooting incident between a startled homeowner and the police kicking the door down. This case is a PERFECT example of that tragic outcome--and it is not the only such example. Except in rare circumstances, no-knocks are more dangerous to the citizen AND the police than traditional warrants.

[Recursion]

152. Remind me why I shouldn't shoot someone who breaks down my door...

...and doesn't immediately identify himself as the police and present identification proving that?

[greccogirl]

154. They DID idenify as police!

She didn't give them a chance for id! She shot them first.

[Recursion]

155. Did they identify?

No-knock warrants generally mean the cops break through the door, restrain everyone they find, and search. Saying who they are comes later. That's also how burglers do their stuff. Robbers also break down doors saying "Police". This gets down to the fact that warrants should, as much as possible, not be violently executed. That's for the cops' protection, and this is an example of why. Yes, the woman was killed. But 3 cops were also wounded. They were wounded because their department favored a short-sighted "let's make the mouth-breathers happy" approach that ignores individual rights of privacy and self-defense.

[greccogirl]

158. Yes they did

according to the news update.

[benEzra]

163. Yelling something as you kick the door down...

isn't the same as knocking on the door, identifying yourself as Officer So-and-So from the Such-and-Such Police Department, and saying you have a warrant to search the premises.

Again, this was a no-knock. There was NO prior warning; the first indication the homeowner had was someone breaking through the burglar bars protecting her front door.

[greccogirl]

175. Yes there was.

Read the article. They announced they were police and went in which is standard on a "no knock" warrant.

[DrBloodmoney]

89. She had a wheelchair ramp at her house

Check out the link. That should have given the cops a little clue...

933 Neal St. Atlanta, Ga

Here's her house with a wheelchair ramp

[MADem]

102. The police did not "issue" that warrant. A JUDGE did. And a prosecuting attorney asked for it.

If, and that's just IF, an informant gave up the address as part of a plea, or a cop was undercover and purchased contraband in that house, that's just the start of the matter. Someone had to ask a judge to issue the warrant, and convince that judge that this was a righteous cause.

The cops executing the warrant are only a piece of the puzzle. The other pieces are the investigators, the DA's office, the judge...

I wonder if the family members are being fully forthcoming when they said the woman lived alone. Did any relative at all stop by regularly? Regularly enough to be a fixture, at least at certain times of the day?

There are a thousand questions, and no answers, really, yet. I'm not prepared to condemn ANYONE in this unfortunate tragedy. All we know is that a warrant was served, a woman is dead and three police are wounded.

Beyond that, who knows what the details were? There are too many blank spots yet to be filled in. A good start would be if we could see the actual warrant.

[iverglas]

117. just thought you'd like to know that one person read it

(I said pretty much exactly the same thing upthread, btw.)

Not many others appear to be interested in, oh, facts ...

[Recursion]

103. People who push for no-knock warrants hate cops

And want them to get shot.

[lakercub]

109. absolutely

especially in plain-clothes...No-knock warrants in plain clothes are about the best way to get shot a cop has. This should be outlawed forever.

Further, no-knock drug raids should be outlawed. Stake out the house, surround it, whatever. But the risk-reward for no-knock drug raids is absurdly bad.

[TheCowsCameHome]

108. G. Gordon Liddy must have a woody three feet long today.

He just loves this kind of armed homeowner stuff.

[Vorta]

111. I like to wait for all the news before taking a position on these cases

I don't know if any of y'all remember the caseof Rayful Edmonds, perhaps the largest gangster to operate out of Washington Dc who didn't have Capitol parking permit.

Rayful's grandmother was part of the opertation, using her house, and recorded on FBI tapes talking in pig latin to other operatives. Rayful was actually a class act, except that he murdered people. His employees had a health insurance plan, I kid you not.

[iverglas]

140. The NAACP can wait for facts

unlike a majority of people in this thread.

http://www.11alive.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=88037

Members of the NAACP attended the press conference and said police gave evasive answers to several questions. Dr. R.L. White, president of the Atlanta chapter, says he's not accusing police of wrongdoing, but he does want to know they did things right.

"Evasive answers" could also be answers that withheld certain information because of an ongoing investigation or because the information was not complete yet, I'd say.

The police have addressed some of the things worrying people here, though:

In a noontime press conference, Assistant Police Chief Alan Dreher told reporters an undercover narcotics officer bought drugs from a man inside Kathryn Johnston's house on Tuesday afternoon.

... Dreher says his officers were in raid uniforms, that a marked patrol car was parked out front, and a uniformed police officer was in the front yard when the officers approached the house. ...

Police say they did find drugs in the house which are being tested at a lab on Wednesday evening. They say they are searching for the man who sold them the drugs. They do not know if he lived with Johnston or was a relative.

Sure, we don't have to believe the police -- that a drug buy occurred, that they found something resembling drugs in the house. I just wonder what basis there might be for not believing them at this point.

[greccogirl]

156. More than likely it WAS

a relative - and she probably had a gun because she was probably as scared of the dealer as the cops would've been......

[Name removed]

167. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[greccogirl]

176. Amazing. Praising someone for shooting

police officers in the line of duty with a legal warrant.

Granny got what people get when you shoot at cops.

[Name removed]

191. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Crim_n al]

196. If 3 strange men who I don't know to be police

ever break down my door and come bursting into my house, I hope I kill the lot of them.

And I'm both a grandmother and a pacifist.

And don't forget, in many countries citizens have had a genuine need to defend themselves from the legally set up authorities of their own country. With the direction America, Britain and Australia have taken, I could see this becoming a concern for many genuine liberals.

[Rex]

182. I find it highly unlikely she shot off three rounds and hit them all.

Sounds like a lot of bullshit.

[RamboLiberal]

188. AJC: Shooting victim, 92, shot officers five times

Snippets

Atlanta police say undercover officers bought drugs from a man inside the home of a 92-year-old woman hours before she was killed in a gunbattle that left three officers wounded.

Neighbors and family members say Kathryn Johnston was a feeble and frightened woman who rarely let people into her home, even when it was just friends bringing groceries.

The woman apparently heard police breaking through the burglar bar door before breaking down her front door. Johnston was ready. She fired her revolver and five shots struck the officers just as they rushed in the door. One was hit three times and the other two once each. All were later released from Grady Memorial Hospital.

Medical examiners said the woman was shot twice in the chest and in "other extremities."

It was not clear how many times Johnston was shot. Dreher said "not all officers" discharged their weapons.

Darrell Watkins of Atlanta, one of the people gathered for the prayer vigil, said the neighborhood is "one of the worst in the city," but looking at Johnston's home, he said it hardly looks like the site of drug activity: "It's got a wheelchair ramp out front, and it's real clean," he said.

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/atlanta/stories/2006/11/22/1123metshot.html

Article also has guy who did her yard work quoted as saying she was real scared and that she always went to bed 5-6PM. Police break-in probably woke her up.

[saigon68]

192. was shot twice in the chest and in "other extremities."

The old "Double tap" referred to above

[Name removed]

197. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OllieLotte]

198. Geez.

[Heidi]

199. Locking.

Flamefest.