Wednesday, July 10, 2013

If true, this is inexcusable.

I've often said reporters and lawyers are not exactly know for their honesty, but if this is true, the city needs it's ass spanked. And again, if this is true the sergeant needs at least to be demoted.

Nevada Man Sues Police for Commandeering His Home to Surveil Neighbor

...A man and his family from suburban Las Vegas have sued local police for violation of their rights as guaranteed by the Third Amendment to the Constitution.

...The tale told by Anthony Mitchell of how he and his family were robbed of these rights is compelling and cautionary.

Mitchell was sitting at home in Henderson, Nevada, on the morning of July 10, 2011, when the phone rang. Officer Christopher Worley of the Henderson Police Department was calling Mitchell to tell him that the police were going to take over his house. In order to gain “tactical advantage” over Mitchell’s next door neighbor, Officer Worley reportedly explained, police were going to set up shop in Mitchell’s house.

There was no asking if Mitchell would mind such a surrender of his home. The officer was informing Mitchell that they would be commandeering his house. In his legal complaint against the Henderson Police Department, Mitchell claims that he didn’t want to get involved with the police department’s operation against his neighbor and accordingly refused to let police occupy his home.

Not surprisingly, Mitchell’s refusal didn’t sit well with law enforcement. Again, according to Mitchell’s complaint, Officer David Cawthorn of the Henderson Police Department, one of the members of the force who were named as defendants in Mitchell’s lawsuit, “outlined the defendants' plan in his official report: 'It was determined to move to 367 Evening Side and attempt to contact Mitchell. If Mitchell answered the door he would be asked to leave. If he refused to leave he would be arrested for Obstructing a Police Officer. If Mitchell refused to answer the door, force entry would be made and Mitchell would be arrested.'”

It isn’t hard in the these times of police militarization to predict what happened next.

Just before noon, five (or more) officers of the Henderson Police Department “arrayed themselves in front of plaintiff Anthony Mitchell's house and prepared to execute their plan,” according to the narrative laid out in Mitchell’s lawsuit.

After showing up at Mitchell’s door, the officers allegedly “banged forcefully” on his door and demanded that Mitchell and his family open up.

Seconds later, Mitchell claims, “officers … smashed open his front door using a metal ram.”

Standing in his living room in shock, Mitchell says that the officers “aimed their weapons” at him and ordered him “to lie down on the floor.” Fearing for his life, Mitchell complied.

Mitchell says that while he was prostrate on his front room floor, Henderson Police Department officers shouted “conflicting orders” at him, some commanding him to “crawl” toward the officers, with others demanding that he stay put.

Mitchell’s complaint continues the account of this incredible afternoon:

Confused and terrified, plaintiff Anthony Mitchell remained curled on the floor of his living room, with his hands over his face, and made no movement. 
Although plaintiff Anthony Mitchell was lying motionless on the ground and posed no threat, officers, including Officer David Cawthorn, then fired multiple "pepperball" rounds at plaintiff as he lay defenseless on the floor of his living room. Anthony Mitchell was struck at least three times by shots fired from close range, injuring him and causing him severe pain.

Police then took Mitchell in custody and, as they reportedly planned to do, arrested him for obstructing a police officer. After arresting Mitchell, officers searched his home, then proceeded to rearrange furniture and establish the tactical lookout they wanted all along.

Remarkably, Mitchell’s complaint claims that police played out a similar scenario at his parents’ home just down the street. Mitchell alleges:...


Mitchell v City of Henderson et al Complaint by dmataconis


The report is referring to the 3rd Amendment forbidding the housing of soldiers in private hours. That doesn't apply. The police are not the military or the militia. But this, if accurate, is definite violation of 4th and 5th Amendments as well as leaving the officers open to official oppression charges (or whatever they sell call it in Nevada)

I hope this is not accurate.

2 comments:

  1. The plainiffs need to sue these steroid-morons into the next century. Nothing worse than having corrupt police oficers abusing the laws and the people they serve. I would love to see these a-holes fired and criminally charged, but that will never happen due to these ploice unions, protecting these dirtbags.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon,

      Again, we gotta see the full story. I've linked to a web site and the plaintiff's suit. But again, if this is true there is no excuse. If the man was just staying in his house he is not committing a crime. I will try and keep my eye on this and see how it go on.

      Delete