Yikes- 2 bombs exploded at the Boston Marathon

[bae]

but, is anyone else concerned about the martial-law look of boston in photos? and searches of homes without warrants (just going door to door and searching?). Of course, people can permit police to search their homes, which circumvents this -- but what if someone refused? then what? a shoot-out at their home? harassment? going to get a warrant?

Google "exigent circumstances". I had to take a whole class on this as a firefighter/EMT.

Your house is on fire, and there is a need to remedy imminent danger to life or serious damage to property, I'm coming in, no warrant needed. The police will come in under their own set of similar circumstances. There's a whole pile of Supreme Court cases on this.

Now, of course, you have to be reasonable about your actions, and there is a whole bunch of fine print.

But likening that to "a police state" shows ignorance of law, custom, and history.

[awakenedsoul]

After what happened here recently in Big Bear, (I think his name was Christopher Joiner,) I think they handled this well. Personally, I appreciate all the police do. They're risking their lives, (and many of them are getting killed these days,) with all these criminals shooting at them at carrying explosives. I just shake my head when I hear the stories. As a single woman, I would greatly appreciate them searching door to door when they know the person is in the immediate area. The housekeepers in Big Bear were tied up. Police officers are getting shot and killed... I am very relived when I hear these criminals are killed or caught. (Or when they kill themselves.) Police work has become such a dangerous job. We have so many enraged people with guns these days. In a local case they sent the police dog in first, and the guy shot the dog. I think we're lucky that the police officers will stay in the field. I can't imagine being in their position. When I think back to 9/11 and all of the firefighters who lost their lives trying to save others...it's just so sad and tragic.
The one thing that stands out to me is that people are helping solve these crimes. The cameras, phonecalls, and tracking are all leading to captures and arrests. It seems like people were more passive before. Now they are participating and assisting.
I think it was very wise to stay inside. I'm glad I have a stockpile of food and two German shepherds. It's a different world now, and I'm afraid we will see more crimes of this sort.

[Life_is_Simple]

but, is anyone else concerned about the martial-law look of boston in photos? and searches of homes without warrants (just going door to door and searching?). Of course, people can permit police to search their homes, which circumvents this -- but what if someone refused? then what? a shoot-out at their home? harassment? going to get a warrant?

At one of the press conferences, the police rep said that what they were doing was focusing more on searching garages, sheds, and (maybe?) basements, where a person might hide. <-- that, more than just walking into someone's house.

[Life_is_Simple]

All that said, the strategy did work in this instance. What worries me is they are now casually discussing dimissing the rights of a US citizen (redefining him as an enemy combatant) just because it may be more expedient to do so.

I want them to read him his rights, let the public defender lawyer get things lined up, and do this all the proper way.

[bae]

I want them to read him his rights, let the public defender lawyer get things lined up, and do this all the proper way.

Yes, they need to run him through the full civil court system, since we are still a nation of laws, and not operating under martial law.

But, you only need to read him his rights under certain circumstances, and they may not think they need to worry about them.

It is possible they simply don't intend to use his testimony to convict him.

[Zoebird]

But likening that to "a police state" shows ignorance of law, custom, and history.

Exigent circumstances do not apply here.

As I understand it, the police asked to enter any premises -- which is not necessary when it's exigent circumstances, and therefore indicates that this did not qualify as exigent circumstances.

Likewise, it is perfectly acceptable for someone to choose to allow a search of their property for a suspect, and likewise equally acceptable for them to refuse.

My interest is in what would happen if someone had refused (I haven't heard of anyone refusing in the media thus far -- admittedly, i'm not looking hard! lol). What then?

Likewise, to see such a large city shut down with all manner of police and military vehicles around, with the suggestion that everyone stay inside and wait to give permission for their property to be searched *does* look a lot like a police state.

[Zoebird]

Also, in relation to ignorance in terms of law, history, and custom: the difference between civil and criminal courts.

[bae]

By "civil" I meant "civilian" as opposed to "military", alas my iPad betrayed me. See Rehnquist's book on the subject.

As to "exigent circumstances", that's a judgement call by the person on the scene. I'm issued an axe and a halligan tool, and other fun toys, and assumed to have a certain amount of judgment, and I *will* force entry into your home under some circumstances, without a warrant. I might *choose* to be polite, but it's not *required* in many cases :-)

[Zoebird]

one of those 'damn you, autocorrect!' moments. and I agree that this is a civilian matter, not a military one. martial law is really interesting.

[Zoebird]

And for the record, I did have to take a whole class in law school on due process, so I'm pretty clear on the law, history, and custom. We spent a fair amount of time on search and seizure, exigent circumstances (ec), including what "hot pursuit" may mean, and of course things like plain sight doctrines and related.

Usually, the very fact that someone is *asking* is enough to assert that it's not exigent. But, it's not an illegal s/s issue because the people give permission.

That's why I'm questioning -- what would have happened if a person refused? Would they assert ec?

And even more, what I'm questioning is what people are thinking about their own experience. On the one hand, with nothing to hide, I have no issue with the search for someone in my property per se -- in particular if the circumstances are truly exigent. But on the other hand, the nature of this process. . . this particular one in boston. . . just seems so. . . weird. And, I'm wondering how I would have felt about that circumstance.

And in general, what americans who are living there feel about it.

Also, living in a country with similar history, custom and law, it's interesting to me that here in NZ, if a suspect runs into your house and sits down on the couch, and the police come to the door -- that's an exigent circumstance technically -- they usually walk away and get a warrant, rather than go in and get into a potential legal mess.

Granted, there's not as much violent crime here. Most of it is theft.