HB 56: How the
State wants to legalize more killings of innocents by police Bill Simon, February 17th, 2015
HB 56:
Purposely Designed for Subterfuge & Misdirection
Introduction
If you were to go on Yahoo, Google,
or Bing search engines, and type “kevin
tanner habersham baby” in the search bar, what will display is a wide
assortment of article titles of the following nature:
“Tanner
proposes bill to limit no-knock warrants”
“NE Ga lawmaker files “Baby Bou Bou bill”
“Bou Bou” family gratified as Georgia considers no-knock …”
“Toddler Maimed by SWAT Flash Grenade Sparks Georgia Bills on ..”
“NE Ga lawmaker files “Baby Bou Bou bill”
“Bou Bou” family gratified as Georgia considers no-knock …”
“Toddler Maimed by SWAT Flash Grenade Sparks Georgia Bills on ..”
After scanning the article and
reading some of them, you MIGHT have concluded that the legislation is an
attempt to limit “bad results” like the Habersham County incident in mid-2014 where Bou-Bou was burned by a flash-grenade
tossed into a room by SWAT executing a no-knock warrant on a
house where they received a tip from a source of drugs being sold out of the
house. (A case currently under investigation by the US Attorney’s Office)
You might have concluded that, and I don’t fault you for
that…because that is what I assumed
the bill was going to attempt to do. But, this bill, as written now, does
nothing that will address the
problems with law enforcement personnel executing a no-knock warrant.
Absolutely NOTHING
to prevent preventable death and/or injury to both Law Enforcement Personnel (“LEO”) and innocent people who are
involved in such a process through absolutely no fault of their own.
HB 56 is a bill designed to
white-wash decades of
judicial activism that enabled LEO to obtain and execute illegal search warrants, which are
referred to as “no-knock warrants” in the common environment. HB 56 is a
whitewash because it actually amends current law to define “no-knock warrants” where no such term currently appears,
and it obliterates the existing law (OCGA 17-5-27)
that prohibits warrants that allow no verbal announcement from LEO before they
breach a door.
This is what existing Georgia law
is with regards to Search Warrants:
OCGA 17-5-27. Use of force in execution of search warrant
All necessary and reasonable force
may be used to effect an entry into any building or property or part thereof to
execute a search warrant if, after
notice, an attempt in good faith to give verbal notice by the officer directed
to execute the same of his authority and purpose:
(1) He is refused admittance;
(2) The person or persons within the
building or property or part thereof refuse to acknowledge and answer the
verbal notice or the presence of the person or persons therein is unknown to
the officer; or
(3) The building or property or part
thereof is not then occupied by any person.
As no-knock warrants have been being
executed in Georgia (like the one in 2006 that killed an innocent homeowner Kathryn Johnston during a drug raid on
her home in Atlanta, and many others, “no-knock” means “no verbal notice given at all.”
How did the LEO community obtain
these illegal search warrants? They went to their respective jurisdiction’s
judges and concocted a bunch of weak evidence (a “tip” by a known criminal in every case I
will discuss), and then they added language (likely what they learned by
watching Crockett & Tubbs on Miami
Vice reruns) to the Warrant Request that would make the judge think
that a full-on violent breach of the home is fully justified, and the judge
would sign-off on them being allowed to ignore OCGA 17-5-27.
And, so, now, State Rep Kevin Tanner is on the verge
of amending Georgia law to make no-knock warrants easier to obtain without any repercussions to “bad acts” by LE
in the execution of those warrants. (Yeah. “Subterfuge” is an understatement,right, Rep. Tanner?)
State Rep.
Kevin Tanner
People may or may not be aware that Georgia State Representative Kevin
Tanner spent about 18 years in law enforcement, working for the Dawson County Sheriff’s Office (“DCSO”)
prior to being elected state rep from that neck of the woods. Most
of the readers of the Political Vine are familiar with an incident back in
August of 2014 involving an officer with the Dawson County Sheriff’s Office
named Captain Tony Wooten. (If
you are not familiar, go to the PoliticalVine.com
website, and type-in “PumpkinGate”
in the Search bar on the right-side of the site, as there are several stories
about this incident in Dawson County).
Now, Kevin Tanner was not present at the PumpkinGate
incident…however, coincidentally,
his direct history as a law enforcement officer with the DCSO is connected to both this story
involving Wooten, as well as HB 56.
In this article I wrote regarding the cover-up by the DCSO personnel on
Wooten’s acts in PumpkinGate, I
described a document I had received via Open Records filings with the DCSO.
That document is referred to as “G-335D: OFF-DUTY,
EXTRA-DUTY EMPLOYMENT.”
In that article, I detailed what the
“written policies” are that DCSO personnel who are on Off-Duty or Extra-Duty
are to follow when engaged in any kind of law-enforcement-related activity
while not being “On-Duty.”
And, basically how Wooten, who was on Extra-Duty, had not followed those written procedures, and how Sheriff
Carlisle and Major Goodie also simply ignored those written procedures as well to help cover-up Wooten’s actions.
So, how does Rep. Tanner fit into
all this? The original Word document of G-335D that I was emailed from
the DCSO was last touched by…”Kevin
Tanner” who had last revised it on June 6, 2009. (Here is a link to that original Word Doc that has his
name as the “Author”).
So, Kevin Tanner knows fully well exactly the kind of
bullsh*t, do-nothing
language he sticks into the language of
HB 56 that (Lines 118-121) gives people
like Wooten and EVERY OTHER LEO the right to give the middle-finger to any
violations of any LE department’s “written policies” as follows:
<“The failure to comply with written policies adopted pursuant to
paragraph (3) of subsection (e) of Code Section 17-5-21 shall be considered a
technical irregularity within the meaning of this Code section.”
“Technical irregularity?” You mean “technical irregularity” of
ignoring this part of your new language via HB 56 (Lines 63-74), Rep. Tanner:
“(e)(2)(A)
The law enforcement agency that employs the officer seeking such warrant has
adopted written policies for using no-knock that comply with paragraph (3) of
this subsection;
“(e)(2)(B)
It requires execution between 6:00 A.M. and 10:00 P.M., unless the judge for
good cause expressly authorizes execution at another time; and
“(e)(2)(C)
The affidavit or testimony supporting such warrant establishes by probable
cause that if an officer were to knock and announce identity and purpose before
entry, such act of knocking and announcing would likely pose a significant and
imminent danger to human life or imminent danger of evidence being destroyed.
“(e)(2)(3)
Not later than September 1, 2015, any law enforcement agency that may seek a
no-knock shall adopt guidelines and procedures that shall include, but shall
not be limited to:”
Just call it for what it is, State
Rep. Tanner. Do you have the balls to do that? Calling the
ignoring of written policies a “technical irregularity” is an OPEN INVITATION
(just like what your pal Tony Wooten and your other pals at the DCSO did, and
continue to do) for every single law enforcement officer and/or LE Department
in this state to ignore their “written policies”
and ratchet-up the no-knock warrants and kill and maim and beat anyone to death
that they please in their fervent efforts to collect their asset forfeiture plunder. Which leads
me to…
Asset
Forfeiture: The Racket
Nowhere in the language of HB 56 is
any reference to “asset forfeiture.” But, yet, I know (as does Kevin
Tanner…and every
prosecutor, former or otherwise, and every
LEO in support of this bill knows) it is the reason why Rep. Tanner is
proposing this bill. NOT
to “save lives” or any such other bullsh*t lies coming from Tanner, et al. who
supports this bill. Those claims are all part of the subterfuge. And, any legislator who has
co-sponsored the bill is either as fully knowledgeable as Tanner is, or they
are gullible to believe every word he says. (Legislators? Gullible?
Say it ain’t so!)
Want proof? Consider the case in
Habersham County in mid-2014: A petty criminal acting as an informant to
the Habersham Sheriff’s office claimed that he had purchased drugs from the
occupant living at the house. A “tip” from one crook is enough
“probable cause” for a SWAT team to be armed to the gills and get a no-knock
warrant to raid a house? Really? Why the f*** are cops now relying
on ONE CROOK’S word that illicit activities are occurring at a house in order
to justify their acts?
Were drugs found? Nope.
Was someone harmed who didn’t have a gun and body armor? Yep, an
18-month old baby sleeping in a crib in the house.
Why would cops just take the word of
a crook? A person who kinda…sorta…has a record of being deceptive?
Because, this is what very likely went on in the mind of the lead drug
investigator when he got this “tip”: “Drug
dealer?….Money…lots of money…Drug dealers have lots of cash on them….we can hit
that house, get evidence of the drugs…and confiscate under asset forfeiture ALL
the money and property in that house. Let’s get that judge to sign-off on
the no-knock so we can ALL have a pay-day in this county!!!”
And, how do I have any inkling as to what went thru
that guy’s mind (along with his direct report’s mind)? Because of the
extremely callous nature of the Habersham County’s Sheriff who uttered these
words in relation to incident: “Bad
things can happen. That’s just the world we live in.”
No, Sheriff of Habersham County. YOU and your asset
forfeiture-hungry LEOs caused that “bad thing to happen.” That was no ‘Act of
God’ like a tornado is.
And, not even a glimmer of responsibility from that guy. Is
that the type of environment that you are okay with, Rep. Tanner? How about
you, Rep. Golick?
Rep.
Efestration? Is that what you learned working
for DA Danny Porter?
If the FBI agents tasked with
investigating the Habersham County incident were smart, they should check into all the bank accounts that the
Habersham County Sheriff has access to. Because I’ll bet dozens of donuts that
there is some illicit activity going on with bank accounts in that jurisdiction
that causes people like that sheriff to remark in such a callous way about the
injury his actions caused that resulted in no crime being discovered that
justified that injury.
See, I bring-up bank accounts
because part of the proposed amendment of Georgia’s asset forfeiture law in
2013 involved controls put on sheriffs and other LEO chiefs on how they could
handle their “pirate finds” of money and assets.
From my
2013 story on this issue, here are some aspects
that the Georgia Sheriffs Association found of particular concern with (and, then-Association President/Sheriff Howard Sills of Putnam County getting quite…angry on camera) the 2013 proposed legislation…and, when people get angry
like Sills did, to me it signified something else was going on that he wasn’t going to let the committee
know:
“HB 1
clarifies some current provisions regarding reporting and eliminates confusion
over what the funds may be used for by explicitly defining the specific use of
money confiscated — the same as federal law.
“HB 1 will
create more transparency and accountability by strengthening the mandatory
reporting requirement of all law enforcement agencies.
“HB 1
strikes a much needed balance in forfeiture law by protecting individual property
rights and public safety against those involved in criminal enterprises. “
You see, the Sheriffs’ Association
didn’t like the prospect of people looking over THEIR shoulder at their accounting of finances and
money collected via asset-forfeiture processes. And, the Prosecuting Attorneys Council
(then-represented by DA Danny Porter on that hour-long video linked in the
comment regarding Howard Sills’ testimony) certainly didn’t want any interruption of their sharing of the plunder with
their local sheriff’s operations.
Then, there’s the incident in
Laurens County in late 2014 that involved the killing of an innocent homeowner
named David Hooks. Here’s the
short synopsis of that incident: A thief (yes, another crook) picked-up by Laurens County LE for stealing from David Hooks told the cops
that a car that he
stole from Hooks had a bag containing 22 grams of meth in it…thus
implying that Hooks was involved in drug distribution.
Did the Laurens County cops think
“Hmmm…maybe we need to stake this guy’s house out and see if we can catch him
in the act?” NOPE!
They get a no-knock warrant, suit-up in their fancy-dancy
federally-issued SWAT toy attire and proceed to raid the house, and kill David
Hooks. You can read the fuller
story on this link, but the fact of the
matter is, as was reported in multiple news sources, no drugs, not even
a nanogram (a billionth of a gram) was found in Hooks’ house after the cops
murdered him.
Even the GBI came on that scene and helped searched the house…and
not a trace of drugs was found.
In stories you can find on the Web
about this incident in Laurens County, they remark how successful a businessman
David Hooks was. My contention is that the Laurens County cops knew exactly who David Hooks was, and exactly how wealthy he was…and
that the following is very similar to what went thru the mind of that Sheriff
(and his fellow LEOs) to justify
his department’s acts in getting the illegal
(according to Georgia law now) no-knock warrant: “Rich guy….really rich mother-f***er…we can get ALL his assets, his
house, his bank accounts, his cash in the house…rich guys like that always have
money in their houses….he’s likely got a safe with thousands of dollars in
it..that’s going to be OUR money! Let’s raid this f*cker’s house and get
OUR PAY DAY!!!”
Because, if they had found ANY drug
in that house, by way of asset forfeiture laws in this state, all of David
Hooks’ property and bank accounts could be tied to “drug distribution” and all
would have ALL become the Sheriff’s own Pirate
Booty. To use in any manner he (and his other county pals…the DA…the
judges…the county commission…whatever and whoever he wanted to share it with)
decided.
I’m sure that since the Institute for Justice has been exposing outlandish
uses of forfeited assets (several
notable ones in Georgia), a lot of the more outlandish uses of money from asset
forfeiture-based raids has gone “underground” so to speak by these sheriffs and
other LE organizations. But, like termites, just because you cannot always see
them, you know that there is abuse going on with both the raids (like these two
previously discussed in Georgia) and the handling of all that confiscated money
and property…all confiscated because they claim “We’re here to make you,
Joe/Jane Public, safer.” Yeah, right.
How HB-56
Should Be Written
So, let me reiterate the main point
you need to understand (“you” being everyone concerned with their life and limb
in Georgia) about HB-56: It will
actually put into the Official Code of Georgia the “no-knock warrant” law that does
not exist now. Rep. Tanner (and his fellow co-sponsors, gullible or not)
are intent on allowing more no-knock warrants to be
issued under the specific guise of “protecting more people” while at the same
time inserting a CYA note that allows the cops to ignore their required
“polices”, call it a “technical irregularity”, and proceed to MURDER ANYONE THEY DARN WELL PLEASE.
(Hey, Sheriffs gotta pay the bills, right? Go for that asset-forfeiture route
whenever you can, how ever you can accomplish it, right?)
If you go back in time to the Atlanta City PD incident involving a nice black lady
named Kathryn Johnston in 2006, you
might be surprised to find out that the “tip” those cops reportedly acted upon
to bust down her door was also from a “police informant.” You know what the
street-definition of a “police informant” is? It is a crook…a criminal
himself/herself!!!
So, since the common thread in
Georgia appears to be that the cops are ALL operating (2006, mid-2014,
September 2014,etc.) from “tips” they receive from people who have a proven
track record of LYING, it kinda seems to me….I don’t know…maybe I’m reaching
here…I’m just going to go out on a BIG limb here and say that the
qualifications are not stringent
enough in the evidence/tips that cops receive, is it?
I know this: Reform the
asset-forfeiture law, and a lot of these bullsh*t, killing of innocent people
incidents will come to an abrupt halt. (But, that will happen right after
Barack Obama declares himself a Republican, right?)
So, barring the reformation of
asset-forfeiture laws to remove the obvious temptation from going thru the mind
of the crooked-minded, blood-thirsty sheriffs (and any other LEO in Georgia)
who do NOT give a damn about anything but making headlines and capturing
someone else’s assets , golly, what other ways could we reduce these types of
incidents from happening? How about:
1) Rather than allow police to ignore written policies, require them to a) develop them, and
b) require every LEO to read them, and c) require every LEO to follow them or
else get charged with a felony. After all, they’re the ones with the gun,
licensed by the State to enforce the law. Why should they not be required to
FOLLOW a law designed to protect the innocent among us?
2) Require that more evidence from OTHER than a criminal be
required by law to be offered for proof that the intended target poses a danger
to the officers intent on breaching the door without an announcement of why
they want to come in. Something like…three independently-verified
sources? Is the life of the next David Hooks not worth that kind of insurance? (Or, do just “bad things
happen?”)
3) You know what the best option is for HB 56? Kill it. Its design is to specifically allow more innocent killings to occur in
the hope of capturing more money and assets from others. That is its specific purpose, plain and
simple.
Tomorrow
(February 18, 2015) there is a hearing on HB 56. This
bill has been assigned to the House
Judiciary Non-Civil Committee, chaired by Rep. Rich Golick (a co-sponsor
of HB 56). Don’t know which room the hearing is being held or at what time, but
below is a list of the members of this committee, along with their House Office
phone numbers. If you are concerned with HB 56, and its repercussions, you
should call these folks’ offices below, and tell them (or whoever will take
your message since they will not likely have time to call you back) how you
feel about more no-knock warrants being legalized in Georgia:
Rich Golick (Chairman): 404.656.5943
B.J. Pak (Vice Chairman): (404) 656-0254
Dustin Hightower (Secretary): 404.657.1803
Stacey Abrams 404.656.5058
Alex Atwood (404) 656-0152
Mandi Ballinger 404.656.0254
Christian Coomer 404.651.7737
Sharon Cooper 404.656.5069
Pam Dickerson 404.656.0314
Micah Gravley 404.656.0325
Dar’shun Kendrick 404.656.0109
Matt Ramsey 404.656.5024
Nikki Randall 404.656.0109
Bert Reeves 404.656.0287
Ed Setzler 404.656.7857
Brian Strickland 404.656.0109
Robert Trammel 404.656.0314
B.J. Pak (Vice Chairman): (404) 656-0254
Dustin Hightower (Secretary): 404.657.1803
Stacey Abrams 404.656.5058
Alex Atwood (404) 656-0152
Mandi Ballinger 404.656.0254
Christian Coomer 404.651.7737
Sharon Cooper 404.656.5069
Pam Dickerson 404.656.0314
Micah Gravley 404.656.0325
Dar’shun Kendrick 404.656.0109
Matt Ramsey 404.656.5024
Nikki Randall 404.656.0109
Bert Reeves 404.656.0287
Ed Setzler 404.656.7857
Brian Strickland 404.656.0109
Robert Trammel 404.656.0314
Anything
else that Tanner claims, or any LEO, or
any DA, or whoever appears before this committee hearing tomorrow in support of
this legislation claims is part of the “agenda
of misdirection” for this bill.
If you want a more eloquent
presentation on the hazards of this bill, you can read this piece authored by Catherine Bernard (who is way nicer than I am in
presentation) regarding the long history of rights that citizens have (going
back 400 or so years) regarding being secure in their own home:
http://politicalvine.com/politicalrumors/law-and-justice/no-knock-warrants-should-remain-illegal-in-georgia/
Follow PV on Twitter:
@PoliticalVine2
Tags: Asset Forfeiture, Chuck Efestration, Danny Porter, David Hooks, Dawson County Sheriff Office, FBI, GBI, Georgia Law Enforcement, Georgia Sheriffs Association, Habersham Sheriff, HB56, Kevin Tanner, Laurens County Sheriff, no-knock warrants, Prosecuting Attorneys Council, Rich Golick, Sheriff Carlisle, Tony Wooten
Posted in Burt's Pumpkin Patch, Georgia Politics, Georgia State House, Law and Justice, Life & Liberty, Rumors | No Comments »
Posted in Burt's Pumpkin Patch, Georgia Politics, Georgia State House, Law and Justice, Life & Liberty, Rumors | No Comments »
PV, February 10th, 2015
[PV
NOTE: The letter below was authored by Catherine Bernard on 2/10/2015]
“…the
house of every one is to him as his castle and fortress, as well for his defence
against injury and violence as for his repose.” –
-Sir Edward Coke, Attorney General of England, Semayne’s Case (1604)
-Sir Edward Coke, Attorney General of England, Semayne’s Case (1604)
Dear Friends,
Yesterday, I attended the House
Judiciary Non-Civil Subcommittee hearing on HB56, Representative Kevin Tanner’s no-knock
warrant bill. This legislation has been touted as a restriction on raids such
as the one in Habersham County where 2 year-old Bou-Bou Phonesavanh was
severely injured by a stun grenade.
Unfortunately, HB56 would actually expand law
enforcement’s authority to conduct no-knock raids – because right now, no-knock warrants are
specifically prohibited by Georgia statute.
A “no-knock warrant” is when a judge
authorizes law enforcement to forcibly enter a home without first announcing
their presence and identity. It’s easy to see how dangerous this can be, and
indeed there are countless cases of both law enforcement
officers and homeowners killed
or injured in the chaos accompanying a
forced, unannounced entry. Avoiding this predictable outcome has been a
priority of the Western legal system for centuries; the “knock and announce”
rule was articulated by Sir Coke in 1604:
“In all
cases when the King is party, the sheriff may break the party’s house, either
to arrest him, or to do other execution of the King’s process, if otherwise he
cannot enter. But before he breaks it, he ought to signify the cause of his
coming, and to make request to open doors…”
The U.S. and Georgia Constitutions
both absolutely prohibit unreasonable searches and seizures. A forcible entry
with no prior announcement of authority or identity is per se unreasonable –
something well understood by generations of Georgia legislators: according to
the Official Code of Georgia, no-knock warrants are illegal. OCGA 17-5-27
plainly states that when executing a search warrant, law enforcement officers
are required to give verbal notice before entering a home by force.
So why are dozens, if not hundreds,
of no-knock search warrants being served around the state of Georgia on a daily
basis? Judicial activism.
Though the legislature made no changes to the verbal notice requirement of the
search warrant statute, after a 1970 ruling by the US Supreme Court, these
“exceptions to the knock-and-announce rule” began to creep-in on a regular
basis. Rep. Tanner said that the “clear precedent set by the courts” makes it
ridiculous to think that no-knock warrants aren’t legal – but that’s a huge
violation of separation of powers.
We’re seeing a lot of terrible
things happen with no-knock search warrants, one of which is the trend for
knock-and-announce search warrants to be served in substantially the same
manner – such as the 11pm raid that killed David Hooks in Laurens County. It’s
admirable that we have legislators who want to step up and address the problem.
But it is imperative that we not make the problem worse in an attempt to fix
it.
As
well-intentioned as HB56 and SB45 are, they both specifically legalize no-knock
search warrants. A concept that currently does not
exist in the Georgia Code, that goes against every principle of our Founding, and even centuries of English
common law, would be given the official approval of the people of Georgia. This
would be a tragic step backwards for our civic freedoms.
I have talked to many law
enforcement officers who insist that they need no-knock search warrants in
order to protect themselves. I have talked to many others who are deeply
concerned about the practice and would like to see it ended for everyone’s
safety. (One woman speaking at the hearing yesterday was the mother of a police
officer who said her son and his friends get carried away and need more
restrictions.)
But the injuries and deaths speak
for themselves – this is a dangerous
practice for all parties, and should not be given further legal sanction.
Our legislators need to have the vision
to see beyond the
immediate demands of agencies that have been flooded with cheap military
equipment by the federal government, and are looking for reasons to justify its
use and presence.
Of further concern are the
provisions in HB56 requiring that all agencies adopt regulations regarding
no-knock search warrants by September
2015. This is passing the buck – if there are procedures that need to be
in place limiting search warrants, then that’s what the legislative process is
for. It’s also a huge windfall for the contractors who will be able to write
these regulations and sell them to local agencies, with little to no oversight.
And while the reporting requirements are admirable, there is no enforcement
mechanism.
The core issue here is that everyone
agrees no-knock warrants are problematic: they are routinely justified by
saying “it’s only a small percentage of warrants” (not true in my experience,
though different jurisdictions have different setups), and even the law
enforcement community is supporting restrictions.
But we KNOW they’re problematic –
that’s why they’re illegal! The sponsors of HB56 want to skip the hard task of
justifying the legality of the practice in the first place, and skip ahead to
saying that it’s time for regulation to fix the problems. This is the perfect
opportunity to talk about why we’ve gotten so far away from our actual laws in
the first place.
In sum, this isn’t a matter of
objecting to incremental change because it doesn’t go far enough – this is an
objection to a threat to the core of our constitutional freedoms and citizens
of Georgia and the United State. No-knock warrants are dangerous and
antithetical to our founding principles. It’s time to reverse decades of
judicial activism fueled by federal government intrusion, and end the practice
entirely. At the very least, don’t make it officially legal. Please email Rep. Tanner and tell him not to legalize this dangerous, unconstitutional
practice.
Sincerely,
Catherine Bernard
Attorney At-Law
Catherine Bernard
Attorney At-Law
PS: For more on these criminal
justice reform issues, please follow my new legal defense nonprofit on Facebook,
Spartacus Legal.
Tags: David
Hooks, Habersham
County baby, HB
56, judicial
activism, Kevin
Tanner, no-knock
warrant, Rich
Golick Posted in Georgia
Politics, Georgia
State House, Law
and Justice, Life
& Liberty
http://politicalvine.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment