Wrong address, and another innocent American dies

The sad part of this is that the police, the ones that are suppose to protect the public, are more often then not, given extremely light sentences when they are found to be guilty. Getting the police to court for there wrong doing is a vary hard process to begin with. I think with police tasked with being the overseers, when they are found guilty of crimes, should receive the max sentence automatically.

To top it all off, the police have no legal or moral obligation to protect the public. The police do not have any responsibility to protect you, they are not required to respond to your calls for help.
 
Last edited:
Once again, I keep coming back to the concept that it might be time to reconsider "government" police. They're a fairly new construct, not an absolute, a given, or a necessity.

Think about it, an entity that makes its own "laws" is allowed to Willy-Nilly "enforce" those laws via violence and has next to no oversight. What could possibly go wrong with that?
 
Last edited:
J R Green said:
Occam's razor. You have to ask yourself what is more reasonable, that the guy pointed a gun at police and they reacted or the police shot a guy through the door for no reason at all. If they go around shooting people all the time for no reason why are we even hearing about it?
Click to expand...

We've heard about it twice this week so far.
 
J R Green said:
I defy you to find one post by me that says or even implies there should be a different set of standards for police.
Click to expand...
Wow.

I'd really rather not, being a relative newbie around here, but since you asked, my answer: From what I've read in this thread (and I've read most of it)...every...single...one. And it astounds me that you don't see that, or that you can pretend not to.

HYPOTHETICAL- Let's say MS-13 "youths" mistake some policeman's house for someone they want to "have a word with." They shoot the policeman's dog (when it surprises them in the yard), and when this disoriented homeowner walks to the front door, in the dark and jammie-clad and pistol in hand, the "youths" are looking through the side window with their NODs (or actually through the walls with their thermal imaging devices) and recognize your cop's pistola or his operator stance, and blow him away. Whether he makes it to the porch or not, you'd be howling in defense of THIS homeowner.

It's bad enough that blue-gang orchestrates an ambush on Waco bikers. Worse that they assassinate ranchers in the snow. Worse still that they shoot 90-lb kids for carrying a screwdriver or flash-bang a baby in his crib or strangle a fat guy for selling untaxed smokes. Nota Bene that ALL of these "public servants" are still breathing my air. But, what's worse even than all that, is that when America is telling you that we see what you've become and we don't like it one bit, your cognitive dissonance immediately goes into hyper-drive.

We're trying to tell you, as nicely as we can, that you've squandered our trust. Since you're not policing yourselves, and you knee-jerk to the defense of your brethren, and your system consistently gives you a pass, and you have no mandate to actually protect anyone, and you spend taxpayer money faster than a souped-up Dodge Charger, and you even have a program to take citizens' property without so much as charging them with a crime, not only don't we trust you...we're having a hard time liking you. And we're the people-liking people!

When the "law" has devolved into being only what the elites favor, and the law enforcement gang only prosecutes what those elites prefer, the citizenry begins having a harder and harder time distinguishing between your gang and any others.

First they came for the Jews, and I wasn't a Jew, so I did not speak up. Then they came for the blacks and bikers and babies. I wasn't any of those, so I didn't speak up. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me. Well, this is us speaking up. We recognize those others as low-hanging fruit in the NKVD world, and we've studied history, and we know what boxcars and camps might lie ahead.

More than I oughtta said, prolly.
 
MurphyLong said:
Well, it's a good thing they're held to a higher standard when caught in a lie, because average citizens are only held to a higher standard when it comes to shooting people.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. The cops are allowed to lie to you. It's s classic technique during their interrogations and one reason never to talk to them without a lawyer. You on the other hand will get slapped with a violation if you lie to them.

Equal standing my foot.
 
noway2 said:
. The cops are allowed to lie to you. It's s classic technique during their interrogations and one reason never to talk to them without a lawyer. You on the other hand will get slapped with a violation if you lie to them.
Click to expand...

I can't remember if it was 48hours or Live PD I was watching. It was sickening how an investigator was bragging about how they can "lie" to get to the truth.
That is a dangerous mantra to have.
I've seen it put two friends in the state pen who did absolutely nothing....except cooperate fully with police, because they had nothing to hide.

It is their job to make a case. Too many of them are really crap at their job, and need to keep that pension.
 
noway2 said:
Incorrect. The cops are allowed to lie to you. It's s classic technique during their interrogations and one reason never to talk to them without a lawyer. You on the other hand will get slapped with a violation if you lie to them.

Equal standing my foot.
Click to expand...


That's a lot of the problem, they think that puts them on s higher pedestal than the rest of the King's pesants.
 
Cpippen said:
That's a lot of the problem, they think that puts them on s higher pedestal than the rest of the King's pesants.
Click to expand...
I know I've mentioned it a few times, but that is one of the key premises in the book The Most Dangerous Superstition; that it is impossible to elevate anyone to the role of "government" and keep that from happening.
 
Cpippen said:
That's a lot of the problem, they think that puts them on a higher pedestal than the rest of the King's pesants.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%.

Any individual in a public safety capacity should never, ever forget that YOU serve the citizens...not the other way around. The 'people' are the employer and you are the employee.

If, in their minds, the citizenry puts you on a pedestal because of what you do, you have no control over it. However, imo, I believe you should try to distance yourself from that. Don't get me wrong....if a citizen expresses gratitude for what you do, nothing wrong with saying, " Hey, thanks, I appreciate it", but follow it up with, "That's why we're here", "That's our job /Just doing our job" or "We're here for you". Personally, I believe it's good to go a step further than that. Thank the citizens for what they do...for getting up every day and going to work, because if they didn't, you couldn't. For anyone serving in public safety, a healthy dose of humility is good and I would even submit that it's a requirement.

Once you start embracing the 'pedestal' mindset, before too long, you'll start thinking you 'deserve' to be on that pedestal. Next thing you know, you'll see yourself as the 'ruler' and the citizens as the 'servants'...

and like @Cpippen stated, that's a lot of the problem.
 
This story has gone really quiet. There has not been much said by The Pd either.
 
Cpippen said:
This story has gone really quiet. There has not been much said by The Pd either.
Click to expand...
There are some newer statements by the family lawyer here:
http://m.wmctv.com/wmctv/db_401748/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=ceqtq0QX

If the new statements are true, the story just seems to be getting worse... Lawyer claims Mr. Lopez was shot through the door in the back of the head, the warrant for Pearson wasn't active at time of shooting, and the wife was forced to stand handcuffed in the yard for an hour.
 
Wow. It seems like grandstanding by the atty., but if there any factual evidence, we're left with the inevitable question...

What did Mr. Lopez know about the Clinton's?
 
Last edited:
wsfiredude said:
Agree 100%.

Any individual in a public safety capacity should never, ever forget that YOU serve the citizens...not the other way around. The 'people' are the employer and you are the employee. @Cpippen stated, that's a lot of the problem.
Click to expand...

The police serve the state. Period. They have no duty to protect or serve an individual.
We are there employer? Agents of the state force us to pay a portion of our income and use some of that to pay for other agents of the state to enforce the states laws against us. I do not think that makes them our employees.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SPM
From the article in post number #260
After the shooting, Wells said Southaven police officers ordered Linares out of her own house, forced her to stand outside in her sleeping garments with her hands above her head, then put her in handcuffs and left her by a tree for an hour. She was eventually taken to the police station where she made a statement, which Wells said he has yet to see.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of what I was saying in the thread about the guy they tazed for refusing to "obey" and it costing the city $110k. Treat people like this and your not going to like the results, but I guess all that matters is that subjects comply and you go home. At least for today.

This Third Reich mentality needs to stop.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SPM
DurhamDad said:
There are some newer statements by the family lawyer here:
http://m.wmctv.com/wmctv/db_401748/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=ceqtq0QX

If the new statements are true, the story just seems to be getting worse... Lawyer claims Mr. Lopez was shot through the door in the back of the head, the warrant for Pearson wasn't active at time of shooting, and the wife was forced to stand handcuffed in the yard for an hour.
Click to expand...

@J R Green IF, and I will agree theatrics and grandstanding may be part of this attorney's statement so I take it for a grain of salt, what responsibility does the cops have for this man's death???
 
Last edited:
You're asking me If, as reported the police went in the middle of the night picked, a house at random caused some kind of commotion and waited for the first person to come near the door and indiscriminately shot through that door killing the occupant who was unknown to them, what should be done about it? Well the cops should be executed in the town square.

But do you @Cpippen see the facts as laid out at all plausible?

I need more salt.
 
Last edited:
I just reread the article and I've been under the impression this was a swat team serving a search warrant. But after rereading it sounds like road patrol going out to try to serve a regular warrant. In that case I can find NO fault for knocking on the wrong door. I thought it was a swat team that had a search and arrest warrant and they roled up with a search warrant and were going in no matter what.

In this case if two patrol officers knock on the door they have no right to go into the house which changes the entire narrative. All they would have done in knock not enter. I have been wrong and you guys might not agree but they have no fault for going to the wrong door since there was not a pre planned operation to go into the house. It totally changes the situation.
 
Last edited:
Don't really understand how it changes things, they are still at fault for being at the wrong house. While I understand that no one is perfect, taking responsibility for your mistakes is critical. I know my son would never intentionally hit a baseball through our neighbors window. However, if he does he will be held responsible.
 
I have missed where it said it was patrol officers ? I still didn't see it when I re read it. I agree that it does change some of the facts of how the wrong address was knocked on, but, the fact still remains from the "evidence" that has been shared that remains to be seen if it is true or not, that they shot the man in the head, thru his door??? That story doesn't sound plausible at all to most folks myself included, and I would HOPE the police didn't do that. If it comes out that things did go down that way then what charges should they face, obviously things went south for them to have knocked on the wrong door flat out, but as Cowboy said if it was not a planned raid it is a bit more understandable. I would take notice thou the mayor stated they asked the sheriff department for help so it may have been a a bit more planned than just a random let's go find him? I don't know how those things work as I am not LEO and wouldn't have a clue on that.
 
Last edited:
Firemedic54 said:
Don't really understand how it changes things, they are still at fault for being at the wrong house. While I understand that no one is perfect, taking responsibility for your mistakes is critical. I know my son would never intentionally hit a baseball through our neighbors window. However, if he does he will be held responsible.
Click to expand...

It changes everything. They were not trying to enter the home they were simply knocking on the door. They had no authority to enter home so all they would have done is knock and be saying, "Police, Police, Police!" It even takes what the neighbors had said in the video above about being woken up from all the commotion in a new context. Because the officers were that damn loud. This wasn't planned out with multiple officers and doing different reviews and having a judge issue a search warrant. These officers simply went to the wrong house ad knocked on the door. Hell I've had officers knock on my door with the wrong adresss before.
I honestly thought this was a raid but I was wrong and it changes everything. Sorry if some here are to biased to understand my thoughts on that but it does.

The shooting part has to be taken on its own merits and evidence and should be separated from the address mistake. I bet you could ask any officer how many times they went to the wrong address and they will tell you all the time. Heck listen to a scanner sometimes and you will here them asking dispatch a thousand different questions about where a place is.

Now then should they have shot the guy? I don't know but it has to be decided on the evidence provided in the investigation.
 
Beat cops do warrant service after midnight? With warrants that aren't even active yet?

Ignoring all that, @Cowboy - you're saying if the home owner then told them to pack sand and they couldn't come in, they'd have thanked him for his time and been powerless to invade his house?

If that were the case, how did his wife end up in handcuffs, outside in her pajamas for over an hour?

I mean it should have been readily apparent within minutes they Killed the wrong person. Minutes.

But an hour?

What could they possibly been up to for an hour in a house they had no legal power to enter?
 
SPM said:
Beat cops do warrant service after midnight? With warrants that aren't even active yet?

Ignoring all that, @Cowboy - you're saying if the home owner then told them to pack sand and they couldn't come in, they'd have thanked him for his time and been powerless to invade his house?

If that were the case, how did his wife end up in handcuffs, outside in her pajamas for over an hour?

I mean it should have been readily apparent within minutes they Killed the wrong person. Minutes.

But an hour?

What could they possibly been up to for an hour in a house they had no legal power to enter?
Click to expand...

If it was a domestic case which is what it sounds like they have a duty to investigate and yes serve warrants at all times of day and can serve all warrants at anytime.

If the home owner does not come to the door they have no rights to enter the home. They have to see the person and know it is that person to enter the home. So NO they could not just enter the home.

Once the shooting happens everyone in the home is a danger and yes everyone would be secured until the scene is secured and you have enough officers to handle everything. After the shooting the officers would have cleared the house and secured everyone inside and yes they would have all been cuffed until the scene was secured. As far as the full hour that's not very long and it sounds like a smaller town it takes time to get people there to start handling things an hour is very reasonable.

The killing the wrong person part:
No they didn't kill the wrong person! They weren't assassins looking for a kill. They went to the wrong house and a guy had a gun and heard them saying police and knocking. The question is was the shooting justified? I don't know but they didn't kill the "wrong" person.


Once the shooting happened they have full legal authority to enter and secure the property. Afterwards they normally go and get a search warrant to secure all evidence.
 
Last edited:
Cowboy said:
If it was a domestic case which is what it sounds like they have a duty to investigate and yes serve warrants at all times of day and can serve all warrants at anytime.

If the home owner does not come to the door they have no rights to enter the home. They have to see the person and know it is that person to enter the home. So NO they could not just enter the home.

Once the shooting happens everyone in the home is a danger and yes everyone would be secured until the scene is secured and you have enough officers to handle everything. After the shooting the officers would have cleared the house and secured everyone inside and yes they would have all been cuffed until the scene was secured. As far as the full hour that's not very long and it sounds like a smaller town it takes time to get people there to start handling things an hour is very reasonable.

The killing the wrong person part:
No they didn't kill the wrong person! They weren't assassins looking for a kill. They went to the wrong house and a guy had a gun and heard them saying police and knocking. The question is was the shooting justified? I don't know but they didn't kill the "wrong" person.


Once the shooting happened they have full legal authority to enter.
Click to expand...

I will preface this by saying I appreciate your responses in these threads - you and I don't often see eye to eye, and I know I am an abrasive bastard at times, but your responses do tend to keep those of us on the other side honest.

Regarding warrants at o'dark thirty - an objective observation suggests this may not be a best practice with regards to the safety of all involved, including the officers.

As to your last statement, they did in fact kill a man, he was not who they were looking for, which made him the wrong guy.

I don't think they went out as assassin's, but I don't think they went out for a friendly chat either.

And for a professional that never means to kill innocent bystanders, they're awfully proficient at it.
 
SPM said:
I will preface this by saying I appreciate your responses in these threads - you and I don't often see eye to eye, and I know I am an abrasive bastard at times, but your responses do tend to keep those of us on the other side honest.

Regarding warrants at o'dark thirty - an objective observation suggests this may not be a best practice with regards to the safety of all involved, including the officers.

As to your last statement, they did in fact kill a man, he was not who they were looking for, which made him the wrong guy.

I don't think they went out as assassin's, but I don't think they went out for a friendly chat either.

And for a professional that never means to kill innocent bystanders, they're awfully proficient at it.
Click to expand...

I appreciate it. Warrant service of domestics happen at all hours of the day for the safety of the victims not the officers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SPM
Agreed warrant service is best done in the evening when most people are home and relaxing. I get that and have no problems with that part of it.

Wrong address??? Hmmm I understand it to s point but, if the paper has that address on it then thry could have confirmed better, mistake yes, fireable or law breaking offense not as much as I thought it was previously but still their mistake cost a man his life.

Now, the shooting, what transpired was horrible and sounds to me from what o have seen as a "jumpy" cop maybe? Not sure of the details still, but I have never said they were assaians out to kill just to kill and I doubt anyone else did either.
 
Cpippen said:
Agreed warrant service is best done in the evening when most people are home and relaxing. I get that and have no problems with that part of it.

Wrong address??? Hmmm I understand it to s point but, if the paper has that address on it then thry could have confirmed better, mistake yes, fireable or law breaking offense not as much as I thought it was previously but still their mistake cost a man his life.
Click to expand...

In this modern world there are not always paper warrants to serve. I'm not saying they can't verify but it's not like the old days of if there wasn't a paper you couldn't serve it. Almost everything is digital and Chief Judge Mark Martin is trying to take everything digital.

Just an FYI
 
I read the articles correctly from the beginning, and was under the impression that it was patrol officers from the outset, so it changes nothing for me.

We don't even know if they made it to the door to knock. Depends on whether the dog was outside or inside when they arrived.

What I am afraid has happened, and hopefully I am wrong here, is that they rolled up, got out, was approached by the dog, shot the dog (which was possibly on a cable going by the pictures) homeowner opens door in response to loud noise (gun shot) with gun in hand EXACTLY LIKE MOST OF US WOULD DO, cops see "man with gun", piss their pants, and shoot homeowner.

It is the scenario a lot of us are envisioning. And to pretend that in today's atmosphere, that this isn't one of the top 2 likely scenarios, is simply disingenuous at best, and statist apologetics at worst.

Hopefully we'll know for sure before too long, but sometimes we never do.
 
Cowboy said:
In this modern world there are not always paper warrants to serve. I'm not saying they can't verify but it's not like the old days of if there wasn't a paper you couldn't serve it. Almost everything is digital and Chief Judge Mark Martin is trying to take everything digital.

Just an FYI
Click to expand...

Are the police going to come up to the house and say they have a warrant, and not be able to produce a paper copy, and expect to be let in?

We already know the police will lie, steal, and cheat to get what they want, why would they not fake a warrant to gain access to a house?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SPM
AR10ShooterinNC said:
Are the police going to come up to the house and say they have a warrant, and not be able to produce a paper copy, and expect to be let in?

We already know the police will lie, steal, and cheat to get what they want, why would they not fake a warrant to gain access to a house?
Click to expand...

Yep they do not always have a paper copy. Just think of all those lying pigs telling stories to all those people. The narrative doesn't really play that way in real life. If they arrest someone it doesn't mean they have the right to search an entire house either. Something I've seen eluded to here is house searches for odors are completely different than searching a car for odor. Lots of misinformation because of YouTube lawyers and professors that teach but don't use the law.
No matter what blog post and MSM want to tell you. The turnover rate is not so much people leaving as much as it is people reporting others behavior. Things are not really as bad as everyone wants to believe.
 
AR10ShooterinNC said:
Are the police going to come up to the house and say they have a warrant, and not be able to produce a paper copy, and expect to be let in?

We already know the police will lie, steal, and cheat to get what they want, why would they not fake a warrant to gain access to a house?
Click to expand...
Cowboy said:
Yep they do not always have a paper copy. Just think of all those lying pigs telling stories to all those people. The narrative doesn't really play that way in real life. If they arrest someone it doesn't mean they have the right to search an entire house either. Something I've seen eluded to here is house searches for odors are completely different than searching a car for odor. Lots of misinformation because of YouTube lawyers and professors that teach but don't use the law.
No matter what blog post and MSM want to tell you. The turnover rate is not so much people leaving as much as it is people reporting others behavior. Things are not really as bad as everyone wants to believe.
Click to expand...

It'll be a cold day in hell before I get served a warrant for anything if I can't see the official documents.

I get we live in a digital world, it's cheaper and saves the State money. I am not above compliance if everything is on the up and up; I just don't trust anyone in law enforcement to not cut corners.

"I have a warrant for (your arrest/to search the premises/etc)" ain't gonna fly if they don't physically have the warrant.

If the issue is pressed, you'll hear about it on the news and via someone else's posts on here.....as well as some pretty emotional defenders of the thin blue line social campaigns.
 
Last edited:
AR10ShooterinNC said:
Are the police going to come up to the house and say they have a warrant, and not be able to produce a paper copy, and expect to be let in?
Click to expand...

You are mistaking two different procedures with this thought. Warrants for arrest are paperless and not needed by an officer just knowledge that it is active.

Now then a Search warrant is totally different and has to be on paper and signed in writing by a Judicial Official. Copies have to be given to the occupant they also get an inventory of all items seized.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SPM
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom