A SWAT raid finally goes exactly according to plan

Status
Not open for further replies.
If it was form a newspaper, it was likely the Houston Chronicle, but I don't have access their archives. Can't find anything on their search engine either.

In this type of swat raid, is there any scenario where they wouldn't shoot the dog? What other methods would they use for a dog? Net?
 
I guess Google isn't the know it all that I thought it was.

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=local&id=4695887

By Mark Garay

(10/25/06 - KTRK/SUGAR LAND, TX) - A Sugar Land woman says police went too far when they burst into her home and arrested her boyfriend and son on drug charges. The raid left her dog dead and caused thousands of dollars in damage.
Also on ABC13.com:
Send news tips | RSS | ABC13 E-lert | Info mentioned on air | Search abc13.com
"It was bang, bang, bang, then there was a boom as they broke the door in, threw the fire grenade, and then shot the dog," said homeowner Margot Allen. "This all happened in anywhere from five to fifteen seconds."

That's how Allen's son and boyfriend describe what happened that day. Sugar Land police acted on a tip. They say they found traces of marijuana and cocaine in her trash after a month-long investigation.

"There's no crack done in my house," she said. "There's occasional marijuana in my house. I don't do it because I don't happen to like it."

Based on the evidence in the trash, a regional SWAT team arrived at the home. Police say they knocked, waited 30 seconds, and then broke in with guns and a concussion grenade. The house suffered $5,000 damage and one officer shot and killed Margot's golden lab, Shadow, when police say it charged toward one of the officers. What did officers find inside?

"A joint half the size of my pinky fingernail and then one about this big," she said, showing a length on her finger. "And not anywhere near this big around."

The Sugar Land Police Department declined an on-camera interview, but they are defending their actions, saying they followed protocol to the letter.

The department says it was determined that the bust would be of a moderate risk. Even though they had no specific threat, they were prepared for firearms in the house and felt obligated to anticipate any resistance or violence. They say killing the dog was regrettable. They also say Allen's boyfriend has a history of drug convictions. But for Allen, it was overkill.

"They treated us like we were terrorists," she said. "They broke the door down. They shot my dog. They set my house on fire."

Both Allen's son and her boyfriend were charged with a Class B misdemeanor for that small amount of marijuana. That's punishable by up to six months in the county jail or a maximum $2,000 fine. Both of them will be in court on January 9.
(Copyright © 2006, KTRK-TV)
Click to expand...

So, a class B misdemeanor. 6 months in the jug.

Yup, flash bangs and shootin' dogs. Yup.
 
Last edited:
LOL @ CropCircleWalker: I just stumbled across that. Basically the same as the original article posted here. I find it interesting that in my search for this story, HoustonNORML didn't pick it up. That's like a 'freebie' for them!
 
I edited it after I saw the link.

I am not for blatant abuse of force, but without a link to anything other than a lunatic website, it really negates any possible validity to those jumping on the cops.
 
I feel the same way. Even having a link to a 'legitimate' website, I still stand by my original position. The SWAT time went in according to protocol. It's the investigations that led up to the SWAT team deployment that I think are faulty.

While searching for that story, I ran across NUMEROUS others out of Sugar Land involving marijuana and local officers. So that suggests to me that this isn't a situation they aren't familiar with (drugs in their community) and the SWAT team is probably getting bad press over bad intel.
 
Why do you guys have to bash the police?

They made the best decisions they could under the circumstances.

They just want to go home to their famillies like everyone else.

Let's wait and hear their side of the story before we pass judgement.
 
We have way too many laws.

We have way too many cops.

There is a sign on the highway on my way to the farm.

"Littering is a Crime"

Up to a thousand dollar fine and

A year in jail"

For Littering.

These guys didn't even litter. They put their roaches in their garbage can.

That's why they will only get 6 months.

I hope they got the fire out without too much damage. The missus is gonna have to mortgage the house to pay the legal fees.
 
I for one am not trying to bash police. I absolutely agree that they probably did the best with the information they had. So, the information becomes the issue. How thorough was the investigation? What constitutes finding a 'trace'? Was it tested? Did they establish that these were in fact dealers or just users? What information did they have to say their was a weapon in the house -- even potentially?

I mean, I'm no LEO (nor I play one on TV) but those all seem like basic questions that would be supported by irrefutable evidence and thus would have supported the actions taken. Just on the face of it, like I said, they spent $1000 for a $2 hooker and didn't even get a kiss goodnight. Just a little peck on the cheek.

I think on a practical, day-to-day basis, what does this say about the country we're living in? For crying out loud, I have to pour unused flour down the drain or someone might think I'm manufacturing crack!
 
"They made the best decisions they could under the circumstances."

I'm pretty much pro police, but I don't think they made good decisions based on the info in the article and the drugs they found. The word overkill comes to mind. Overkill, as in squandering resources, man hours, etc. Maybe they had a snitch telling them the guy was a major player moving heavy weight through town or growing umpteen dozen plants in the basement, but that's not in the article.

John
 
JohnBT said:
I'm pretty much pro police, but I don't think they made good decisions based on the info in the article and the drugs they found. The word overkill comes to mind. Overkill, as in squandering resources, man hours, etc. Maybe they had a snitch telling them the guy was a major player moving heavy weight through town or growing umpteen dozen plants in the basement, but that's not in the article.
Click to expand...

That's why we have to wait for their side of the story.
 
I wonder if Police Departments would do more research and investigating if they had to serve warrants wearing only a suit, tie and a .38 snubby?

Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America

by Radley Balko

Radley Balko is a policy analyst specializing in civil liberties issues and is the author of the Cato study, "Back Door to Prohibition: The New War on Social Drinking."

Executive Summary

Americans have long maintained that a man’s home is his castle and that he has the right to defend it from unlawful intruders. Unfortunately, that right may be disappearing. Over the last 25 years, America has seen a disturbing militarization of its civilian law enforcement, along with a dramatic and unsettling rise in the use of paramilitary police units (most commonly called Special Weapons and Tactics, or SWAT) for routine police work. The most common use of SWAT teams today is to serve narcotics warrants, usually with forced, unannounced entry into the home.

These increasingly frequent raids, 40,000 per year by one estimate, are needlessly subjecting nonviolent drug offenders, bystanders, and wrongly targeted civilians to the terror of having their homes invaded while they’re sleeping, usually by teams of heavily armed paramilitary units dressed not as police officers but as soldiers. These raids bring unnecessary violence and provocation to nonviolent drug offenders, many of whom were guilty of only misdemeanors. The raids terrorize innocents when police mistakenly target the wrong residence. And they have resulted in dozens of needless deaths and injuries, not only of drug offenders, but also of police officers, children, bystanders, and innocent suspects.

This paper presents a history and overview of the issue of paramilitary drug raids, provides an extensive catalogue of abuses and mistaken raids, and offers recommendations for reform.
Click to expand...

Full Text (PDF, 2 MB)

When I first read this I got angry, then I got really concerned. What can be done to ensure people's civil rights AND give LEO's the tools they need to enforce the law?

LoveMyCountry
 
That's why we have to wait for their side of the story.
Click to expand...

Don't we already have their side of the story?
The Sugar Land Police Department declined an on-camera interview, but they are defending their actions, saying they followed protocol to the letter.

The department says it was determined that the bust would be of a moderate risk. Even though they had no specific threat, they were prepared for firearms in the house and felt obligated to anticipate any resistance or violence. They say killing the dog was regrettable. They also say Allen's boyfriend has a history of drug convictions.
Click to expand...

When raid evidence is perceived to glorify the agency, we see it piled up on folding tables and an immediate press conference called. When they screw the pooch, its "decline interviews, ongoing investigation" (aka wait for it to blow over). what category does this incident resemble?

Meanwhile, some members of the public help circle the wagons...:uhoh:
 
"Why do you guys have to bash the police?"

Uh . . . I don't. LEO = Law Enforcement Officer. They are doing their jobs. Don't bash the LEO's, change the stupid laws they are made to enforce.

How many of you got pissed a LEO for giving you a ticket back when the speed limit was 55? A fair number of you I am sure. Was it tho LEOs fault you were braking the law? No. Were you driving in a dangerous manner endangering your fellow citizens? I doubt it. More than likly you were trying to get from point A to point B before you died of old age. So where is the problem with this? You, the LEO or the law?
 
Uh . . . I don't. LEO = Law Enforcement Officer. They are doing their jobs. Don't bash the LEO's, change the stupid laws they are made to enforce.
Click to expand...

I agree, but there are many ways to enforce the current laws. It seems to me that SWAT is being used much too often.

How did Joe Friday make so many arrests before the days of SWAT?
 
I have to take issues with the title and premise of this thread.

We only hear about things that are bad. That's the nature of media. So if we have 10 stories about SWAT teams, 9 of them will probably be about things going wrong. Of course there are other SWAT operations that DIDN'T go wrong, but they hardly ever have stories about them. See where I am going with this? Don't fall into the media trap. The world is not the picture they paint for you.
 
How many of you got pissed a LEO for giving you a ticket back when the speed limit was 55? A fair number of you I am sure. Was it tho LEOs fault you were braking the law? No. Were you driving in a dangerous manner endangering your fellow citizens? I doubt it. More than likly you were trying to get from point A to point B before you died of old age. So where is the problem with this? You, the LEO or the law?
Click to expand...

You are missing the point. Its not about the law, it is about the way the police decide to enforce the law that troubles many of us. SWAT teams should only be used in extreme cicumstances, not for busting down doors of non violent offenders. There have been many cases where the wrong door was busted down, and people injured because of bad intelligence.
 
Swat Teams are used far too frequntly. A couple of nights ago in a town right next to mine (5 miles away), a lady called to report that she had either (depending on which local news channel you heard) seen a man in a ski mask carrying a baseball bat in her yard or thought she heard a man in her house.
She left her property after call 911 and a Swat Team came to the scene and went through her house. No one was found.
Come on...

Biker
 
DRMMR02


We only hear about things that are bad. That's the nature of media. So if we have 10 stories about SWAT teams, 9 of them will probably be about things going wrong. Of course there are other SWAT operations that DIDN'T go wrong, but they hardly ever have stories about them. See where I am going with this? Don't fall into the media trap. The world is not the picture they paint for you.

Once is too many times. 1 inocent harmed is TOO many.
 
Don't toss empty wolf steel casings in the trash. You could get raided on suspicion of having dangerous automatic weapons in your home.

Watch out, junior may be "holding" a baggie for someone at school. You will never know until they raid you and confiscate your guns (including evil assult rifles and high capacity cop killer pistols) then smear you all over the newspaper as a drug dealer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Lima Ohio Swat team kills mom, shoots infant.
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
Bartholomew Roberts
B
B
  • Locked
110 SWAT Team raids TODAY
Replies
18
Views
1K
Jeff White
J
A
  • Locked
Swat raids galore. You might want to think on the following.
2 3
Replies
58
Views
4K
Thin Black Line
T
K
  • Locked
NJ: officers raid wrong house...again
Replies
17
Views
859
JJohnston015
J
B
  • Locked
SWAT Team overview.
2 3 4 5
Replies
113
Views
5K
Art Eatman
A
Back
Top