Atlanta Drug Raid Update - Complications!

[FTL_Ian]

Uh-oh! Looks like all is not as it seemed with the recent Atlanta shooting involving an old lady. Turns out the drug raid may not have even been so "legal" after all:

The informant, who has not been identified, complained to department officials that the drug investigators involved in the bust had asked him to go along with a story they concocted after the shooting, said Pennington. He said the informant had been placed in protective custody.

The informant told an Atlanta television station that the officers asked him to lie to provide them cover in the shooting.

From: http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metr...hoot_html.html

Things are getting a little messy! More from the Cato Institute's Radley Balko:
http://www.theagitator.com/archives/027273.php#027273

Presuming drug laws are legit, and that the original story was true, should warrants be issued based on the words of an informant?

[121Traffic]

Uh-oh! Looks like all is not as it seemed with the recent Atlanta shooting involving an old lady. Turns out the drug raid may not have even been so "legal" after all:


From: http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metr...hoot_html.html

Things are getting a little messy! More from the Cato Institute's Radley Balko:
http://www.theagitator.com/archives/027273.php#027273

Presuming drug laws are legit, and that the original story was true, should warrants be issued based on the words of an informant?

And what story was that? How could they "concoct" the probable cause for the drug warrant? Remember...the affidavit was sworn before the judge, who signed it.

The legality of warrants is a whole seperate issue than the integrity of the officers and the accusations of a "concocted" story. Hundreds, if not thousands, of warrants are served on the basis of informant intel every year. The above case, while tragic, is RARE. I'm still not passing judgement until FACTS are in.

Don't bother debating, as that's not why I'm here. You asked a question, I gave you my answer. Please save us any diatribes.

[FTL_Ian]

The above case, while tragic, is RARE. I'm still not passing judgement until FACTS are in.

Agreed, but while it may be rare, if it weren't for the War on Drugs, those cops would be whole and the old lady alive. No diatribe necessary.

[Retmilleo909]

Agreed, but while it may be rare, if it weren't for the War on Drugs, those cops would be whole and the old lady alive. No diatribe necessary.

Ian, you're sitting up there in a tiny hick-town in NH and you know nothing about this case, other than what you've read or heard thru the media and the AJC, which is one of the most, if not the most, liberal newspaper in the country, and IMO, most of what they print is BS.
In reading between the lines, it seems that you have already tried and found these police officers guilty. Have you even considered the fact, that the informant could be a liar?
When this story first came off the press this lady was 92 and now we find that she's 88.
Doesn't it seem strange that this shy and feeble old lady with her rusty pistol, as reported in the AJC, was apparently waiting at the door and was quicker on the trigger and shot three of these young officers before they returned fire.
The GBI, FBI and other agencies are investigating this case fully, and when they determine exactly what happened they will release their findings.
If the investigating body determines that the officers were guilty of a crime they will be prosecuted, and if not, they will be assigned back to active duty. It's as simple as that.

[TXCharlie]

Norm brought that case up several days ago.

You know who probably screwed the whole thing up and got that old lady killed? A scumbag, dope-smoking paid informant who probably manufactured false information so he could get some more crack with his blood money, and then blamed the cops for his lies.

(Just a wild guess)

[Big Sexy]

Agreed, but while it may be rare, if it weren't for the War on Drugs, those cops would be whole and the old lady alive. No diatribe necessary.

Presuming drug laws are legit,

And with that ladies and gentlemen, the psuedo-academic, has spoken.

You may rant and you may rave about drug laws being unconstitutional.
You may say that they are illegal and that you, don't recognize their legitimacy.
You may kick and you may scream, every-time their is some "drug related" regulation/law pushed through congress.
You may call us jack booted thugs and compare us to nazis, till you giggle with glee.

But, if BIG was to ever catch you dirty, none, not one, single iota of your points and counterpoints will keep BIG SEXY from locking your ass up for violating the law.

This is a democracy, ruled by the majority and you are in the minority. You want to disrupt the status quo, get one of your hemp clothes wearing, weed smoking, friends of NAMBLA elected and become the majority. Till then, bow down to the rule of the people.

[conalabu]

+1 to what Big said.

[OffDuty]

But, if BIG was to ever catch you dirty, none, not one, single iota of your points and counterpoints will keep BIG SEXY from locking your ass up for violating the law.

This is a democracy, ruled by the majority and you are in the minority. You want to disrupt the status quo, get one of your hemp clothes wearing, weed smoking, friends of NAMBLA elected and become the majority. Till then, bow down to the rule of the people.

[OFK]

And with that ladies and gentlemen, the psuedo-academic, has spoken.

You may rant and you may rave about drug laws being unconstitutional.
You may say that they are illegal and that you, don't recognize their legitimacy.
You may kick and you may scream, every-time their is some "drug related" regulation/law pushed through congress.
You may call us jack booted thugs and compare us to nazis, till you giggle with glee.

But, if BIG was to ever catch you dirty, none, not one, single iota of your points and counterpoints will keep BIG SEXY from locking your ass up for violating the law.

This is a democracy, ruled by the majority and you are in the minority. You want to disrupt the status quo, get one of your hemp clothes wearing, weed smoking, friends of NAMBLA elected and become the majority. Till then, bow down to the rule of the people.

What a hot post!

[TheOldRhino]

This is a democracy, ruled by the majority and you are in the minority. You want to disrupt the status quo, get one of your hemp clothes wearing, weed smoking, friends of NAMBLA elected and become the majority. Till then, bow down to the rule of the people.

I got to admit it, Big- this has been one of your better posts.

However, the US is not a democracy. It is a republic. The pledge of alligence doesn't end with "and for the democracy, for which it stands..."

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage. -Alexander Tyler

Now, in regards to Ian's post.

Ian, shame on you for taking an informant's word over the police. Hell, I'd be more understanding if you thought both were BS.

But let's look at it form his perspective, Ian. Now that this whole thing has blown up and 3 cops were hurt and a community is crying out over the death of an 88 year old lady. Guess whose name is going to be on that report, Ian. Guess who is going to be the CI (Confedential Informant) on that report?

And when the community hears about it, what do you think that CI is going to want them to believe? The BS story that he's giving now, or the fact that actually did buy drugs out of that house?

Come on Ian. I thought you better than this.

[Norm357]

Uh-oh! Looks like all is not as it seemed with the recent Atlanta shooting involving an old lady. Turns out the drug raid may not have even been so "legal" after all:


From: http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metr...hoot_html.html

Things are getting a little messy! More from the Cato Institute's Radley Balko:
http://www.theagitator.com/archives/027273.php#027273

Presuming drug laws are legit, and that the original story was true, should warrants be issued based on the words of an informant?

I dont understand this post.

This was a legal raid in the sense that the warrant was signed by a judge. Wether or not the information was based on good intel by the CI has yet to be determined.

I have been following this story closer than most because I live here, and there hasnt been any real information about this raid released yet. Thats why I havn"t posted it yet.

The only real nuggets that has been released to the media is that the old lady didnt shoot all three officers. Just the first one in the door. The other two were hit by friendly fire.

The other thing that was released was that the CI has a long history of drug arrests.

Now this is my opinion only so take it for what its worth.
I think the CI made his story up. I think he did it to show how usefull he is to the APD narcotics squad. He had a good chance of being right seeing the neighborhood the old lady lived in.
I dont think any cop asked him to lie. I think he is now trying to cover his own ass.

Anyhow, with the GBI and FBI investigating this, the truth will come out. Speculating facts before there are any is pointless and awaste of time. Slandering the Officers or the old lady involved in this case is also a waste of time. Wait for the facts to come out then present your case.

[Pudge]

And with that ladies and gentlemen, the psuedo-academic, has spoken.

You may rant and you may rave about drug laws being unconstitutional.
You may say that they are illegal and that you, don't recognize their legitimacy.
You may kick and you may scream, every-time their is some "drug related" regulation/law pushed through congress.
You may call us jack booted thugs and compare us to nazis, till you giggle with glee.

But, if BIG was to ever catch you dirty, none, not one, single iota of your points and counterpoints will keep BIG SEXY from locking your ass up for violating the law.

This is a democracy, ruled by the majority and you are in the minority. You want to disrupt the status quo, get one of your hemp clothes wearing, weed smoking, friends of NAMBLA elected and become the majority. Till then, bow down to the rule of the people.

Well said brother, well said!

[CountyFourteen]

Good post Big

[BigDawg]

Thank you Big for saying what most of us have been thinking!!!!

[Retmilleo909]

>>The only real nuggets that has been released to the media is that the old lady didnt shoot all three officers. Just the first one in the door. The other two were hit by friendly fire.<<

You could be right Norm, but I wouldn't believe it unless the investigative report reveals it.

[Beans]

GUYS GUYS GUYS! Listen please, just ignore this maggot Ian and he will go away. He wants us to get riled up, he feeds off it. This is what he wants so he can run back to his idiot friends and tell them how he pissed off the cops. Plus it is more fodder for that stupid radio show of his. Don't give him the time of day.

[me again]

Presuming drug laws are legit, and that the original story was true, should warrants be issued based on the words of an informant?

It is common practice in narcotics investigations to use the tips of known narcotics users (former users and present users). If you're going to break into the world of narcotics, then you have to deal with narcotics users and sometimes they are willing to dime-out other narcotics users for various reasons.

Yes, I think it's okay to use narcotics users as confidential informants to bust other narcotics users. However, most CIs are pieces of shit.

[FTL_Ian]

This is a democracy, ruled by the majority and you are in the minority. You want to disrupt the status quo, get one of your hemp clothes wearing, weed smoking, friends of NAMBLA elected and become the majority. Till then, bow down to the rule of the people.

Majority opinion does not make right. My choices in life are based on right and wrong, not words on paper written by men.

[FTL_Ian]

Rhino,

I understand that informants are typically scummy. I'm just pointing out that there is more to this story than meets the eye.

Fact is, if there was no war on drugs, those cops' bodies would still be fully intact, and that old lady alive.

[CountyFourteen]

ian......can words on paper written by men be good? or are all words on paper bad?