tman wrote:xd ED wrote:Blackstone's formulation, and the presumption of innocence seem to be at high risk in the practical execution of no-knock warrants…
People misunderstand how presumption of innocence works. It is applied to the courts, where the state must prove your guilt, instead of you needing to prove you didn't do it. You get to sit in the courtroom and basically say, "show me what you got,"
Law enforcement investigations provide evidence for trial. They don't prosecute cases.
"Presumed innocent" is NOT a law enforcement standard. That sounds evil on its face, doesn't it? It's not.
Our standards are reasonable suspicion and probable cause. You're not too likely to hear those terms at trial.
I don't disagree.
Without the ability to act on reasonable suspicion, and articulable probable cause there would be no investigation of any concern.
And that, I believe is where so many have issues with the no-nock warrant/ invasion.
There can be arguments made for such warrants, but only when all, less potentially violent methods of investigation, and if warranted- arrest are exhausted or irrelevant.
In real, practical terms it has a strong possibility of morphing from an act of investigation/ evidence gathering to a fight for survival-by all involved parties,
where the suspected/ accused, and misidentified innocent, will never make it to the court room, and the lives of the LEO, and their families will forever change for the worse.
This by itself is, I dare say an unintended miscarriage of justice, and doubly tragic when the wrong house gets tagged.
This discussion keeps taking me back to the Branch Davidian siege; I can't begin to cite casualties, but among the most memorable points was the fact that the guy they were after- David Koresh- had a daily habit of going for a run outside the compound; same time, same route every day.
Rather than throwing a net over this guy when he was out alone,… well the rest is history.
