Nevada couple suing the police for violating the Third Amendment - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 8th, 2013, 07:48 PM   #1
Tie Dyed
O.G.
 
Tie Dyed's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Howell
Posts: 4,200
iTrader: (28)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to Tie Dyed
Default Nevada couple suing the police for violating the Third Amendment

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...ird-amendment/

I find the question if the police officer count as soldiers interesting. I wonder if it would change anything if the officers were in the National Guard.

The other thing that will make this one to watch is why the homeowner was arrested, because he did not allow Police into his home. The article does not say if they came back with a warrant and he refused their entry into the home. The article states that he was arrested for obstructing a police officer, but how could that happen if the police just wanted to use his home for surveillance?
__________________
2000 XJ with a 3 inch body lift
Tie Dyed is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old July 8th, 2013, 10:31 PM   #2
howell_jeep
Last Free Man
 
howell_jeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-09-06
Location: Howell Twp, MI 48836
Posts: 10,848
iTrader: (69)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

More info here: http://reason.com/blog/2013/07/05/ne...occupation-vio
howell_jeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 8th, 2013, 11:11 PM   #3
Chiefwoohaw
Pokerob is my B*tch!
 
Chiefwoohaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-06-05
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 11,509
iTrader: (7)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Read this a couple days ago and also interested in the outcome.

Edit: Oh yeah and f the police. Hate when I forget that!
Chiefwoohaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2013, 06:36 AM   #4
whiterhino
I'm not old, honest...
 
whiterhino's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-07-06
Location: Davisburg MI
Posts: 22,313
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Default

Don't know the legalities but I don't think it's right. Somehow I think there's more to the story.
__________________
GLFWDA member since 1979.
Member Southern Michigan Rock Crawlers.
whiterhino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2013, 08:03 AM   #5
SS
Doing stuff...and things.
 
SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-12-05
Location: 48309
Posts: 12,142
iTrader: (14)
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Default

Believe it or not Alex Jones was the first one to break this story.

From the interview I read with the homeowner (I'll try and find the link for you guys) the police full on raided his house because he wouldn't let them kick him out to run surveillance on a neighbor. Everything they did to him including the assault on him AND his dog (shot pepperballs at both with paintball guns during the raid) was done without a warrant and a warrant was never issued. It wasn't until later that they started to create paperwork to try and justify what they did.

This is also the same police department that got in trouble a while back for beating the living hell out of a man who was slipping into a diabetic coma and then laughing about it on camera immediately after he lost consciousness. They pulled him over for speeding as he was on his way to the emergency room. He was pleading for help when they approached the vehicle (with guns drawn) and then proceeded to almost kill him.
__________________
-Jer

SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2013, 09:12 AM   #6
Silver Bullet
Livin the American Dream
 
Silver Bullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-18-07
Location: Westland, MI
Posts: 3,810
iTrader: (4)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Wtf!
Silver Bullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2013, 10:12 AM   #7
SS
Doing stuff...and things.
 
SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-12-05
Location: 48309
Posts: 12,142
iTrader: (14)
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Default

http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/07/03/59061.htm

Quote:
LAS VEGAS (CN) - Henderson police arrested a family for refusing to let officers use their homes as lookouts for a domestic violence investigation of their neighbors, the family claims in court.
Anthony Mitchell and his parents Michael and Linda Mitchell sued the City of Henderson, its Police Chief Jutta Chambers, Officers Garret Poiner, Ronald Feola, Ramona Walls, Angela Walker, and Christopher Worley, and City of North Las Vegas and its Police Chief Joseph Chronister, in Federal Court.
Henderson, pop. 257,000, is a suburb of Las Vegas.
The Mitchell family's claim includes Third Amendment violations, a rare claim in the United States. The Third Amendment prohibits quartering soldiers in citizens' homes in times of peace without the consent of the owner.
"On the morning of July 10th, 2011, officers from the Henderson Police Department responded to a domestic violence call at a neighbor's residence," the Mitchells say in the complaint.
It continues: "At 10:45 a.m. defendant Officer Christopher Worley (HPD) contacted plaintiff Anthony Mitchell via his telephone. Worley told plaintiff that police needed to occupy his home in order to gain a 'tactical advantage' against the occupant of the neighboring house. Anthony Mitchell told the officer that he did not want to become involved and that he did not want police to enter his residence. Although Worley continued to insist that plaintiff should leave his residence, plaintiff clearly explained that he did not intend to leave his home or to allow police to occupy his home. Worley then ended the phone call.
Mitchell claims that defendant officers, including Cawthorn and Worley and Sgt. Michael Waller then "conspired among themselves to force Anthony Mitchell out of his residence and to occupy his home for their own use." (Waller is identified as a defendant in the body of the complaint, but not in the heading of it.)
The complaint continues: "Defendant Officer David Cawthorn 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.'"
At a few minutes before noon, at least five defendant officers "arrayed themselves in front of plaintiff Anthony Mitchell's house and prepared to execute their plan," the complaint states.
It continues: "The officers banged forcefully on the door and loudly commanded Anthony Mitchell to open the door to his residence.
"Surprised and perturbed, plaintiff Anthony Mitchell immediately called his mother (plaintiff Linda Mitchell) on the phone, exclaiming to her that the police were beating on his front door.
"Seconds later, officers, including Officer Rockwell, smashed open plaintiff Anthony Mitchell's front door with a metal ram as plaintiff stood in his living room.
"As plaintiff Anthony Mitchell stood in shock, the officers aimed their weapons at Anthony Mitchell and shouted obscenities at him and ordered him to lie down on the floor.
"Fearing for his life, plaintiff Anthony Mitchell dropped his phone and prostrated himself onto the floor of his living room, covering his face and hands.
"Addressing plaintiff as 'asshole', officers, including Officer Snyder, shouted conflicting orders at Anthony Mitchell, commanding him to both shut off his phone, which was on the floor in front of his head, and simultaneously commanding him to 'crawl' toward the officers.
"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." (Parentheses in complaint.)
Officers then arrested him for obstructing a police officer, searched the house and moved furniture without his permission and set up a place in his home for a lookout, Mitchell says in the complaint.
He says they also hurt his pet dog for no reason whatsoever: "Plaintiff Anthony Mitchell's pet, a female dog named 'Sam,' was cowering in the corner when officers smashed through the front door. Although the terrified animal posed no threat to officers, they gratuitously shot it with one or more pepperball rounds. The panicked animal howled in fear and pain and fled from the residence. Sam was subsequently left trapped outside in a fenced alcove without access to water, food, or shelter from the sun for much of the day, while temperatures outside soared to over 100 degrees Fahrenheit."
Anthony and his parents live in separate houses, close to one another on the same street. He claims that police treated his parents the same way.
"Meanwhile, starting at approximately 10:45 a.m., police officers entered the back yard of plaintiffs Michael Mitchell and Linda Mitchell's residence at 362 Eveningside Avenue. The officers asked plaintiff Michael Mitchell if he would be willing to vacate his residence and accompany them to their 'command center' under the guise that the officers wanted Michael Mitchell's assistance in negotiating the surrender of the neighboring suspect at 363 Eveningside Avenue. Plaintiff Michael Mitchell reluctantly agreed to follow the officers from his back yard to the HPD command center, which was approximately one quarter mile away," the complaint states.
"When plaintiff Michael Mitchell arrived at the HPD command center, he was informed that the suspect was 'not taking any calls' and that plaintiff Michael Mitchell would not be permitted to call the suspect neighbor from his own phone. At that time, Mr. Mitchell realized that the request to accompany officers to the HPD command center was a tactic to remove him from his house. He waited approximately ten minutes at the HPD command center and was told he could not return to his home.
"Plaintiff Michael Mitchell then left HPD command center and walked down Mauve Street toward the exit of the neighborhood. After walking for less than five minutes, an HPD car pulled up next to him. He was told that his wife, Linda Mitchell, had 'left the house' and would meet him at the HPD command center. Michael Mitchell then walked back up Mauve Street to the HPD command center. He called his son, James Mitchell, to pick him up at the HPD command center. When plaintiff Michael Mitchell attempted to leave the HPD command center to meet James, he was arrested, handcuffed and placed in the back of a marked police car.
"Officers had no reasonable grounds to detain plaintiff Michael Mitchell, nor probable
cause to suspect him of committing any crime.
"At approximately 1:45 p.m., a group of officers entered the backyard of plaintiffs Michael Mitchell and Linda Mitchell's residence at 362 Eveningside Avenue. They banged on the back door of the house and demanded that plaintiff Linda Mitchell open the door.
"Plaintiff Linda Mitchell complied and opened the door to her home. When she told officers that they could not enter her home without a warrant, the officers ignored her. One officer, defendant Doe 1, seized her by the arm, and other officers entered her home without permission.
"Defendant Doe 1 then forcibly pulled plaintiff Linda Mitchell out of her house.
"Another unidentified officer, defendant Doe 2, then seized plaintiff Linda Mitchell's purse and began rummaging through it, without permission, consent, or a warrant.
"Defendant Doe 1 then escorted Linda Mitchell at a brisk pace through her yard and
up the hill toward the 'Command Post' while maintaining a firm grip on her upper arm. Plaintiff Linda Mitchell is physically frail and had difficulty breathing due to the heat and the swift pace. However, Doe 1 ignored her pleas to be released or to at least slow down, and refused to provide any explanation for why she was being treated in such a manner.
"In the meantime, the officers searched and occupied plaintiffs Michael Mitchell and
Linda Mitchell's house. When plaintiff Linda Mitchell returned to her home, the cabinets and closet doors throughout the house had been left open and their contents moved about. Water had been consumed from their water dispenser. Even the refrigerator door had been left ajar and mustard and mayonnaise had been left on their kitchen floor."
Police took Anthony and Michael Mitchell to jail and booked them for obstructing an officer. They were jailed for at least nine hours before they bailed out, they say in the complaint. All criminals charged were dismissed with prejudice. They claim the defendants filed the baseless criminal charges "to provide cover for defendants' wrongful actions, to frustrate and impede plaintiffs' ability to seek relief for those actions, and to further intimidate and retaliate against plaintiffs."
None of the officers were ever subjected to official discipline or even inquiry, the complaint states.
The Mitchells seek punitive damages for violations of the third, fourth and 14th Amendments, assault and battery, conspiracy, defamation, abuse of process, malicious prosecution, negligence and emotional distress.
They are represented by Benjamin C. Durham, with Cofer, Geller & Durham, in Las Vegas.
__________________
-Jer

SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2013, 01:51 PM   #8
L4CX
Out for the Summer!
 
L4CX's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-07
Location: Hillsdale, MI
Posts: 4,998
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

That blows my mind that they would go that far. I hope the family gets full justice on this and officers are, at the least, fired.


inb4hancho
L4CX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2013, 02:53 PM   #9
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,579
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

I don't know if they'll win on the third amendment since it wasn't soldiers, but I would think definitely the forth amendment, since their house was seized.

But I also get the feeling that there is more to the story that we don't know.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2013, 03:58 PM   #10
joe_jeep
welfare wheeler
 
joe_jeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: hazel park, mi
Posts: 5,861
iTrader: (37)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Send a message via Yahoo to joe_jeep
Default

if there was more to the story, why was there not a search warrant issued?
if they had even a remotely decent reason to go in, a warrant would be issued.
joe_jeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2013, 05:05 PM   #11
SS
Doing stuff...and things.
 
SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-12-05
Location: 48309
Posts: 12,142
iTrader: (14)
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe_jeep View Post
if there was more to the story, why was there not a search warrant issued?
if they had even a remotely decent reason to go in, a warrant would be issued.
Exactly.


What happened here was a militarized police force that was inconvenienced (and rightfully so) by an innocent civilian that refused to let them kick him out of his own house so that they could conduct operations and they retaliated against him to an extreme level.

They should all be fired and imprisoned. This behavior is exactly what our Founding Fathers warned us about 200+ years ago.
__________________
-Jer

SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2013, 05:11 PM   #12
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,579
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

I didn't say what the "more" that I thought there might be to this story, just that I get the feeling it sound like one of those stories that never quite gets fully told. I agree that based on what were told there was no justification for what the police did.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2013, 05:14 PM   #13
SS
Doing stuff...and things.
 
SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-12-05
Location: 48309
Posts: 12,142
iTrader: (14)
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn View Post
I didn't say what the "more" that I thought there might be to this story, just that I get the feeling it sound like one of those stories that never quite gets fully told. I agree that based on what were told there was no justification for what the police did.
If you look up at my first reply to this post you'll see another example of the actions of this particular police department.

To put it simply... they have gone rogue. There is a culture amongst the officers of that department that leads them to believe that they are above the law and can do whatever they want. Just another branch of the government that has forgotten who they work for and who they serve.
__________________
-Jer

SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2013, 08:52 PM   #14
L4CX
Out for the Summer!
 
L4CX's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-07
Location: Hillsdale, MI
Posts: 4,998
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

This is a random question and PURELY hypothetical. Also keep in mind, I've never taken a CCW class or do I claim to be on the 'in' crowd with laws and such. I'm just really curious.

If the home owner was stupid enough, would he have the legal right to shoot the officers once they entered his house? Going up against 5 or 6 highly trained officers would just be plain suicide, but let's just say he lights them up. What would/could he be charged with?
L4CX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2013, 10:01 PM   #15
joe_jeep
welfare wheeler
 
joe_jeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: hazel park, mi
Posts: 5,861
iTrader: (37)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Send a message via Yahoo to joe_jeep
Default

once he knew they were "police" he pretty much had to comply at least "semi peacefully".

if they did not announce themselves, and entered, he would at least have an argument in court. he would have been killed by the swat team shortly thereafter though.

they seldom charge dead people with crimes!
joe_jeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 10th, 2013, 10:31 AM   #16
3-foot
Senior Member
 
3-foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-21-06
Location: Springfield Township, Mi
Posts: 1,130
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

The Federal constitution's 3rd amendment was a restriction on the federal government against the States. It does not apply here and they should lose this case if that is their stance.

However it is a clear violation of the Nevada State Constitution Article I section 12....

http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Const/NvConst.html#Art1Sec12

Sec: 12.  Quartering soldier in private house.  No soldier shall, in time of Peace be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of War, except in the manner to be prescribed by law.


Assuming you can make the case that police are soldiers of the State.
3-foot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 10th, 2013, 11:57 AM   #17
SS
Doing stuff...and things.
 
SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-12-05
Location: 48309
Posts: 12,142
iTrader: (14)
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Default

Don't forget that the 3rd Amendment aspect of this case is just one small part of it and not the entire case by any means. If they can successfully argue that the police have now become a military force it'll change a lot of things legally (as far as I understand it) in how the police operates in situations like this.
__________________
-Jer

SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 10th, 2013, 12:31 PM   #18
Immortal
NO RELIGION WAT!
 
Immortal's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-09-05
Location: In my garage
Posts: 26,317
iTrader: (46)
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3-foot View Post
The Federal constitution's 3rd amendment was a restriction on the federal government against the States. It does not apply here and they should lose this case if that is their stance.

However it is a clear violation of the Nevada State Constitution Article I section 12....

http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Const/NvConst.html#Art1Sec12

Sec: 12.  Quartering soldier in private house.  No soldier shall, in time of Peace be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of War, except in the manner to be prescribed by law.


Assuming you can make the case that police are soldiers of the State.
Civil servants of the state NOT soldiers
Immortal is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:38 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.37675 seconds with 74 queries