Barnes v Indiana - resisting unlawful entry...

[Heffay]

I'm not even going to say what I really think.

Good, because it gets worse.

Did anyone really think this wasn't going to happen?

...

I'm going to turn off the internet for the rest of the night. There's nothing but bad news out there.

F the police.

[Rip Van Winkle]

There must be more to this story than is being reported.

This quote makes no sense.

Justice Samuel Alito said in his opinion for the court that people have no obligation to respond to the knock or, if they do open the door, allow the police to come in. In those cases, officers who wanted to gain entry would have to persuade a judge to issue a search warrant.

Than why would you allow the police to kick in doors and gather evidence without one?

[Rotary12]

Even though this is a state issue, I can see it ending up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

[Norsesmithy]

Why would this be a state issue? This is very basic 4th amendment stuff. If anyone who gets on a Supreme Court can't get this crap right, those old bastards need to take 9th grade civics again, preferably from a teacher with a short temper and a metal edged ruler. And the people of the state need to get their money back from all of their nominating governors and every legislator who voted to confirm those clowns.

Preferably payable in strips of skin.

[jgalt]

There must be more to this story than is being reported.

This quote makes no sense.

Justice Samuel Alito said in his opinion for the court that people have no obligation to respond to the knock or, if they do open the door, allow the police to come in. In those cases, officers who wanted to gain entry would have to persuade a judge to issue a search warrant.

Than why would you allow the police to kick in doors and gather evidence without one?

The ruling doesn't require the person or people in the home to be complicit in the entry of an officer, and neither does it bar an officer from entering if they believe evidence is being destroyed.

The first half of that statement doesn't conflict with the second half. The problem is with the second half & the 8 folks in black robes who think it is reasonable...

[642rUS]

The Indiana Attorney General (the "winner") is seeking a rehearing on the erroneous ruling that a citizen can't resist UNLAWFUL police action. Even he recognizes that Indiana isn't the USSR or Peru.