| | Home
The Daily Dose/May 28, 2011
By Gaylon Kent
The Writer's Shack
Notes from around the Human Experience...
WE THE PEOPLE: The Fourth Amendment, the one dealing with us being secure in our homes and stuff, took a beating this month, as the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that the citizens of Indiana do not have the right to resist police unlawfully entering their homes.
Apologies Are Issued: We're not entirely sure why this took so long to come to our attention. The opinion was issued on May 12, after all. True, the slow economy did require us to close our Hoosier bureau, but still.
Dry, Technical Matter: The case itself is rather routine. Richard Barnes is moving out of his apartment as he and his wife were yelling at each other. While outside his apartment police arrive. He goes back in the house and the officers want to come in, too, but Barnes tries to stop them. (It's useful to note that Mrs. Barnes didn't invite the officers in, either).They force their way in and Barnes gets frisky and ends up with some misdemeanor battery, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest charges being thrown around.
Insult To Injury: Officers used a chokehold and a taser on Barnes, who ended up being taken to the hospital. We're not complaining about this. Unlawful entry or not, don't fart around with the law. There's no percentage in it.
Dry, Technical Matter: Barnes is found guilty and then starts making noises about his right to resist an unlawful entry into his residence, and how that wasn't explained to his jury and how this constituted 'reversible error' because had the officers not entered his residence in the first place there would not have been those pesky charges to begin with, much less evidence to convict him with.
Yeah, Right, Whatever: Nonsense, said the Indiana Supreme Court. They said it right off the bat, too. We read the opinion and there it is, towards the end of the very first paragraph:
We hold that there is no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers.
Yeah There Is: Just for funsies, here is the Fourth Amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Yeah, Well, You Know: That would seem to be clear: citizens are to be secure in their homes. Even the most farthest-right-wing, whack-job, pro-police state whack job would agree that citizens are protected from unlawful entry by the police. It's one of the reasons we got rid of the British.
LOL: What's funny is that the Court acknowledged the centuries old common law right to resist unlawful police action and United States Supreme Court opinions upholding this right.
Moving Ahead To Further Action: They didn't really care, though, and they shed some light on their thinking a bit later in the opinion:
We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest…
So What? If police aren't unlawfully entering homes, they don't have to worry about being resisted.
What The Hell's Going On Here? The Court waived away its disregarding of the Fourth Amendment, not to mention centuries of common law and US Supreme Court opinions, by saying:
We believe however that a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.
What The Hell's Going On Here II? Exactly what is modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence? Is that code for police can do whatever the hell they want now?
We're Sure There's A Point Here Somewhere: This came later in the opinion:
Nowadays, an aggrieved arrestee has means unavailable at common law for redress against unlawful police action.
So What II? This is not a satisfactory explanation for this ruling. While mindful that what the law refers to as exigent circumstances that would preclude both a warrant and consent exist, it is wrong to allow the police to do whatever they want, obliging a citizen to go through the trouble of getting redress in the courts.
Get Your Official Writer's Shack Policy Right Here: The purpose of government is to provide for the liberty of its citizens, even in Indiana. Allowing police to go into homes whenever they damn well please is in violation of that duty.
Oh Yeah: Barnes was out of luck appealing his convictions, too. They were upheld.
"SUDDENLY THE DAY BECOME NIGHT": A total solar eclipse occurs on this date in 525 BC. Warriors fighting the Battle of Halys were so awed by the event, they called a truce since it was plain the gods wanted the fighting to stop.
Dry, Technical Matter: Although eclipses have been used to pinpoint approximate dates of events in the BC era, this is the earliest event that an eclipse can be used to fix a date with certainty. Earlier events are, at best, narrowed down to a couple of possible eclipses.
Five Is Enough: The Dionne quintuplets are born on this date in 1934, in Canada. They would become the first known quintuplets to survive infancy, and all survived to adulthood. Three are still alive today.
Going…Going…Gone: Dale Long of the Pittsburgh Pirates becomes the first major league player to hit home runs in eight consecutive games on this date in 1956. The mark would later be equaled by Don Mattingly of the Yankees and Ken Griffey, Jr. of Seattle.
A Warm, Personal Remembrance: My late brother and I were at Arlington Stadium the night Mattingly would've broken the record, had he homered, which he didn't, though he did go 2-4 with a double. Texas won 20-3, too, with Yankee catcher Rick Cerone pitching the final inning.
Thought For The Day: There is simply no reason to abrogate the common law right of a citizen to resist the unlawful police entry into his or her home. - Robert Rucker, Justice, Indiana Supreme Court, In Dissent, Barnes vs. Indiana.
Answer To The Last Trivia Question: A nautical mile is equal to one minute of latitude.
Today's Stumper: The trivia question will return.
Comments? Recipes? Complaints? Email the Writer's Shack here!
Home |
| |
