No Knock Meets the Castle Doctrine: Man Shot Five Times by Police, No Drugs Found, Arkansas Man Charged with Assaulting Officers

For many years, civil libertarians have complained about the increase in “no knock”warrants, particularly after the decision in 2006 by the Supreme Court in Hudson v. Michigan. Now, it appears that no knocks have collided with another trend: castle doctrines or “make my day” laws allowing homeowners to defend their homes with lethal force. When Tracy Ingle in North Little Rock heard someone coming through his window, that is precisely what he did. He grabbed his legal handgun and pointed it at the window. A shot immediately ran out, severing most of one leg. After he fell from the bed, he was hit by four more shots from police — who later charged Ingle with assaulting them, even though he had not fired a single shot.

Ingle had a long interaction with the police, but never a crime a violence. The police had secured a no knock warrant weeks earlier on probable cause of a drug operation. They would find no drugs — only a scale and baggies claimed by others.

The raid on January 7, 2008 could now raise a fascinating question of whether an individual in a castle doctrine state is assaulting an office when acting under such a law — absent proof that he knew these were officers. The case may also focus attention on no knocks, particularly when they are issued weeks earlier to get stale. The Ingle family also alleges that he was interrogated at the hospital without counsel and that his medications were denied to him.

The Supreme Court first addressed no-knock warrants in Richards v. Wisconsin, 520 U.S. 385 (1997), where it rejected a blanket exception for all drug cases to the “knock and announce” requirements under the Fourth Amendment. In another Arkansas case, Wilson v. Arkansas, 514 U.S. 927 (1995), the Supreme Court has held that officers must knock and announce to give citizens warning that they are officers. One of the reasons often cited is to prevent accidental shootings by citizens, who may feel a break in.

In Hudson, a 5-4 decision, the Court refused to apply the exclusionary rule to evidence gathered in violation of the “knock and announce” requirement. In his opinion, Justice Scalia that the “social cost” was too high to exclude such evidence. That decision effectively destroyed any meaningful deterrent for abuses of no knock searches.

For the full story, click here

11 thoughts on “No Knock Meets the Castle Doctrine: Man Shot Five Times by Police, No Drugs Found, Arkansas Man Charged with Assaulting Officers

  1. Welcome to the George Bush/NRA version of America. And where is John McCain appearing today? Why, at the NRA National Convention.

  2. Here is the world Scalia has created by the Hudson decision. I hope he enjoys it as he tallies up the “social cost.”

  3. How are citizens supposed to know that an intruder who comes crashing through a window is a really a police officer with a “no knock” warrent? Anyone can yell “Police, Search Warrent.” And that is exactly what kick robbers have done in the past.

    If someone comes crashing into a home, it is reasonable to assume that they are criminals. Certainly they are engaging in criminal behaviour no matter who they are. If under those circumstance, a citizen is killed or injured, it is a crime and the officers should be held accountable. If a police officer is killed or injured under those circumstances, it is a tragedy but would probably be justifiable. An exception might be that the citizen was actually proven to be engaged in some criminal activity. However, that might mean a return to the “old days” when some officers would plant evidence to cover their own mistakes. No knock warrents are a very bad idea. I don’t understand how they can be allowed under our Constitution.

  4. Let me slide a conspiracy theory in here even as I detest that label.

    Going as far back as President Jimmy Carter there was an emergence of what Bush senior called the “New World Order.” New World Order appears to be Western style economy on a global scale…requiring of course a new World government and World courts and World trade law. Example is the stealth SPP (Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.) This agreement (without Congressional approval) was signed by Bush, Fox, and Harper. USA Mexico Canada…a North American Union with “the Amero” as currency. The status is in limbo because Right Wing republicans effectively killed the migration from Mexico by blocking comprehensive immigration. (This is probably the reason for the current housing bust because the NINJA loans made housing available to Mexican immigrants, illegal or otherwise, and now, the influx has been stymied. This is Bush’s retribution for not passing, so called, comprehensive immigration and his resistance to bailing out the housing market. Bear Sterns, of course, is different and another story) The SPP appears to be a way to loot the natural resources of Canada. Point is, in order for the New World Order to work, the economy of the US must be destroyed and Mr. Bush is well on the way toward that goal. The shredding of the constitution, loss of habeas corpus, declaration of enemy combatants, and the infusion of the swat team mentality, Blackwater mercenary troops in New Orleans despite Posse Comitatus and total disregard for the rule of law has resulted in the blocking of any type of resistance for when the North American Union is put into place. According to Mr. Bush, things must be in play be 2010.

    While this story is about a drug raid, it is additional proof that the rule of law no longer applies to any US citizen. A powerful, robust, US economy based on US law stands in the way of the New World Order Government. The sovereignty of the US, which according to the US Constitution, is invested in its citizens, is at risk. The individual identity of each of us is being separated from the American freedom we once knew.

  5. And here in Florida our Castle Doctrine is even more outrageous — presumption of being threatened here (commonly referred to as “Shoot First” here). Honestly, I don’t see how Jehovah’s Witnesses continue to do what they do in Florida.

  6. castle doctrine right, no knock warrants wrong!!

    when threatened every citizen should be able to defend his or herself without fear of reproach from an oppressive govt.

  7. I agree Castle Doctrine Right, No Knock Wrong!
    People saying “Bush senior called the “New World Order.” really don’t know History the “NEW WORLD ORDER” has been around since George Washington.
    The fact that “in order for the New World Order to work, the economy of the US must be destroyed and Mr. Bush is well on the way toward that goal”.
    Well, wake up, people wanted change and that’s just what they are getting now and now they aren’t so sure they wanted it, but it’s too late. With this new change this is the “NEW WORLD ORDER”.
    The stimulus package has done more damage to our Country, than any other one thing. Take a look at the Constitution, the 10th Ammendment, alot of States are rejecting the stimulus package under the 10th Ammendment, because by accepting the package it give the Government the power over the States to do what they want and the State is no longer a Sovereign State.
    As the saying goes , I’ll keep my 2nd Ammendment Rights, you keep the change”

  8. Why don’t the people put their name and address down who don’t believe in “castle doctrine” here in Florida so the scum can know who you are. For me, that Remington 12ga is an awesome deterrent.

  9. I absolutly agree with the castle doctrine, because people have no busisness getting into somebody’s elses home, I mean if you are working or doing nothing at home, I’m not going to shoot you, but if you break into my home, I do have the right to blow your head off, imagine if everybody would do that, crime would be significantly lower, but because of idiots that prefer to defend the criminals than the honest citizens we are where we are right now, I agree, people that dont agree with the castle doctrine, should publish their names and adresses in an special list, similar to the don’t call list, thats one thing I dont understand about society, one group of people want to impose their opinions and ideas over other that dont share the same opinion, so this way we would give this people the oportunity of live under their believes, and if you are a criminal, you would know where to look before you break into somebody’s home.

Comments are closed.