[editor: pls read Comment Guidelines]

It wasn’t illegal, and they dropped the charges. What more is there to say….corrupt cops are the one’s that need a punch in the mouth. Who got caught with their finger in the cookie jar? Oh, the NPD.

[editor: pls use tinyurl]

You favour absolutist monarchy, but were born two centuries too late. This is
the age either of democracy or surveillance fascism.

Think of me as the master sergeant who never took another promotion because he’d miss out on too much fun. Actually, that describes one of my uncles.

I was trying to cause meaningful discussion and to add to the dialogue. I hope that this was clear from my post.

Your rules will be obeyed and honored.

I am a conservative.

I know that many people, both left and right demonize the other. I have done this and admit my own actions. I was refered here because this thread addresses an abuse of power, by the state, upon a citizen and this forum was addressing that.

Many here seem to think, in how they express, that conservatives are responsible for this, or don’t mind it.

That would be incorrect. We can debate each other on substantive issues and not come to a consensus as to policy.

But, this story was posted on conservative sites also, and not as a good thing. This was shown as abuse by the state upon a citizen, who was wronged by agents of the state, who then tried to intimidate and cover up what they had done.

To me, conservatism is about limited government. I can hear the groan, and imagine the shaking of heads, and someone thinking of how conservatives are responsible for the Patriot Act (never did like the name of that). We, all of us, regardless of our political leanings, must remember the fact that both conservatives and liberals voted for this in staggering numbers.

I want to float an idea, if I may?

I do agree with the idea of more gov’t intrusion, but AND THIS IS CRITICAL, with a check and balance of accountability, and with a guarantee of freedom. What do I mean?

I mean that if we create a system where a gov’t agency can listen to our phone calls or banking records, then the prosecutor, judge, and agent who does this is held to account. Whereby if they find no treason, or terroristic threat the information MUSt, under penalty of law (not letter of reprimand, – PRISON TIME) destroy the information and purge it from the data banks.

Also, any charge or detention (and no, I am not talking about Guantanimo ?sp) must be accountable. PRISON time to any gov’t SERVANT who deprives an innocent of liberty. And if a judge upholds this, or gives immunity to our SERVANTS, they are disbarred, and imprisoned.

In other words, and I may not be expressing myself well, and for that I apologize, if you take my freedom, and it is found I am innocent, or that you blocked me from showing my innocence, then you (gov’t official) will spend the same amount of time in prison as I would have spent.

That’s what is missing. Sure we can have people check to make sure we have no dealings with terroriests, or that we are funding them, but in the case where I am shown to be innocent …. my good name must be protected, and a signed sworn statement must be issued.

Our police and prosecutors DEMAND we abide by the law and obey suppeanas (man, my spelling is terrible, I apologize), but in the same vein, they must be answerable when my freedom is taken. No immunity to prosecution or civil suit is defensible.

I paraphrase: “the right to petition gov’t and to seek redress”

That’s accountability. If an officer deprives me of my freedom, like in this case, wherein a clear conflict of interests is, he or she must be shown how that is applicable to their freedom. They may lose their jobs or pensions? Wow, and so what? I lost my freedom due to my reporting a violation of my rights and of their conduct.

Oh, and it may surprise you to learn. I am soldier serving in Iraq (proudly!), but I want my gov’t to be my SERVANT and to be held accountable. No immunity for gov’t officials, not when they call themselves my servant, but act as my master.

I hope I have added to the discussion.

SGT [whole name withheld] , Steven
Serving Proudly in Iraq.

With sincere hopes we can find common ground

[editor: welcome aboard, Steven.  Pls read comment guidelines.  Normally, we'd cut a Comment this long.  You [and Long Rifle -- above] are commenting on a Post off the main page; so, it’s not as big a priority.]

1. I did not overlook the Constitution – it is implicit in my reference to federal and state law, and federal and state court decisions. Laws are written and passed within the framework of the the respective constitutions (either US or state). Those laws that are believed to be unconstitutional may be challenged in court, whereupon they are either upheld or ruled unconstitutional. Didn’t think that I had to break it down Barney style in my previous post, but I obviously was mistaken.

2. Your argument that the police did not follow procedure and violated the 4th Amendment is not supported by reality or case law on the matter.
2-1. Police do not necessarily have to leave private property when requested. In fact, they could have obtained a search warrant to search the house for the wanted juvenile. Instead they attempted to work with Mr. Gannon to apprehend his son, but he was hostile and uncooperative from the start. It is also possible that they could have entered the residence without a warrant to arrest the juvenile. The law allows law enforcement officals to enter the residence of a wanted subject without a search warrant in order to make an arrest. A search warrrant is required only to enter the pemises of someone else other than the wanted subject in order to find that subject and take him into custody.
2-2. The alleged foot in the door is not a 4th Amend. issue.
2-3. The items that were seized were not “illegal” – they were instruments of an alleged crime and it was proper to take them into evidence.
2-4. Once again, the warrant was for the entire residence. So you’re telling me that it is inconcevable that Mr. Gannon might lie and not disclose the location of everything that he had. Case law allows the police to look anywhere within a residence (to include the curtilage) where the sought items listed in the warrant application may be located. Anything found as result of the search, but not listed on the original search warrant application, may be seized as evidence depending upon how it was found. For example, if the search warrant was for a gun used in a murder and the police looked in a nightstand drawer and found a kilo of cocaine, the cocaine could be used as evidence against the the owner of the property because it was found in a location where a firearm could be located. Given the same situation except that the item listed in the search warrant was a 50″ plasma TV, the cocaine would be inadmissible as the nightstand drawer would not be a reasonable location to look for the TV.
2-5. The amount of time required to secure and search the house was not unreasonable given the timetable required to obtain a search warrant. Once again, this is supported by case law on the matter. Search warrants are preferred over consent searches in felony cases. This way a person cannot later claim that they only gave consent because they were under duress.

If I were a betting man, I would bet a year’s salary on 2 things:
1. That if the case is dismissed, it won’t be on 4th Amend. grounds
2. That Mr. gannon’s complaint is being investigated and if substantiated, the appropriate NPD employess will be disciplined.

You adamant assertions that the police commited heinous and blatant violations of the 4th Amend prompts me to inquire what law school you claim as your alma mater. I am assuming it is of higher quality than that attended by the judge who reviewed the search warrant application for probable cause and signed the warrant.

3. NPD didn’t post the information – the Nashua Telegraph did. The police are required to release certain documents (per court decisions on the matter) when requested by the media.

4. I didn’t feel it necessary to include the link to the picture I was referring to as it is located at the top of this BLOG. It was taken directly from the Telegraph article.

Det Karlis didn’t swear out a complaint against Mr. Gannon, he merely put together the search warrant application. Bias? How so? Either the evidence is there or it isn’t. Once again I refer you to my original question to Sniper as to whether Det Karlis acted the way he did knowing he was being taped. Doesn’t pass the common sense test. I know you claim that you are not against the police, but you seem to be taking everything that Mr. Gannon is claiming as gospel and implying that everyone involved on the NPD side is lying, is biased, or has alterior motives.

I won’t go into the privacy issue any further. The case law is there. It is clear that everyone in this forum has their own opinion on the matter, and it will be up to the court to make the final ruling on the matter.

[editor: you're off the main page; so, I'll let this slide -- but, read comment guidelines, pls.  Usually, we'd cut a post this long.]