It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
he federal indictment alleges that Autry knew the NCIS informant had not purchased any methamphetamine from anyone at the residence and the NCIS informant had not proven himself to be reliable in the past. Additionally, the indictment alleges that Autry had not confirmed that there was heavy traffic in and out of the residence. Based on this false information, the magistrate judge issued a “no-knock” search warrant for the residence and an arrest warrant for W. T., who allegedly sold the methamphetamine. The warrant obtained by Autry was executed approximately two hours later, during the early morning hours of May 28, 2014.
originally posted by: Blazemore2000
a reply to: alienjuggalo
Every cop involved with this unfortunate fiasco should be indicted. Not that indictments mean anything when so many fools will fail to find wrongdoing in anything law enforcement does.
-OP source snippet
Despite the fact that Habersham county jurors in the local case found the warrant to have been obtained in a “hurried and sloppy” manner, lawyers for the sheriff and the other officers denied that “false and misleading information was used in the search warrant application.” This is also in spite of the fact that no drugs were found during the raid.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: ProfessorChaos
Same would apply to the judge, in my opinion. It's not his job to investigate the circumstances. The deputy swore under oath that her affidavit was correct and true. It's on her for lying, not the judge for accepting a sworn statement as being true.
If we're gonna go after the judge and all the other deputies involved, why stop there? Get the sheriff for hiring them in the first place. Whatever law school the judge went to for giving him a degree. County board of supervisors for having a sheriff's office. The ex deputy's FTO for not making sure she wasn't going to lie in a sworn statement at some point. Maybe even the crib manufacturer for not making a flashbang proof crib. The possibilities are endless.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: dreamingawake
Those who lied under oath should be held accountable.
Going after the officers who conducted the raid purely because they conducted the raid is a different matter. Unless they knew it was a bogus warrant and testified that it wasn't. In which case, absolutely go after them for THAT.
originally posted by: alienjuggalo
a reply to: Shamrock6
So If a couple of my friends and I decide to go buy some weed and one of my friends decide to shoot the dealer should I be charged?
If we start going after judges and prosecutors maybe they wont just blindly believe lying cops.
originally posted by: ProfessorChaos
originally posted by: alienjuggalo
a reply to: Shamrock6
So If a couple of my friends and I decide to go buy some weed and one of my friends decide to shoot the dealer should I be charged?
If we start going after judges and prosecutors maybe they wont just blindly believe lying cops.
If the judge went by the book, what is there to punish?
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: alienjuggalo
Of course it doesn't matter.
To you.
Last I checked civilians don't have the authority to raid a house for any purpose. Again with the apples and oranges.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: alienjuggalo
Still more apples and oranges comparisons.
originally posted by: alienjuggalo
originally posted by: ProfessorChaos
originally posted by: alienjuggalo
a reply to: Shamrock6
So If a couple of my friends and I decide to go buy some weed and one of my friends decide to shoot the dealer should I be charged?
If we start going after judges and prosecutors maybe they wont just blindly believe lying cops.
If the judge went by the book, what is there to punish?
If I am involved in the commission of a crime I will be charged with any crime the people also involves committed.