Officers got a search warrant for plaintiff’s property to search for a person missing since 1997. They drilled holes in plaintiff’s concrete garage floor, and a cadaver dog allegedly alerted. They emptied the garage and started digging. They piled dirt on plaintiff’s belongings considering it “junk.” Their digging down 15' undermined the structure, and they supported it on their own. They found nothing and left, and they felt unobliged to do anything to restore the condition of the property. Ground water from rain created a pond in plaintiff’s garage. *Why should the feel obliged? They're "Only Ones," and based on results, were following established department protocols.
You people and your "rights"...
You can see photos of the damage here and here. I'm sure if you did this to Dwayne Wenninger's house, he'd be taking things in stride...
*NOTE: I've removed the link to the main story paragraph--it generates an obnoxious 403 anti-spam msg, and apparently the folks who run the website don't want referred traffic. Interesting readership-building model. Fine by me, I get nothing by sending readers their way.
[Via Mack H]
9 comments:
Clicking shows a 403 error report.
I guess they don't want the traffic. I clicked on their "bypass" link in the "forbidden" msg and it took me to the page.
Yo. Got it. What was that on Wenningers' site about protecting private property? These fuck-ups have been fighting restitution for SIX YEARS?
Wow, I just flashed on the ATF raid on Fred Lawmaster's home about 20 YEARS AGO. The ATF was looking for an unregistered full-auto, I think. They waited until he wasn't home, broke in, cut open his gun safes, dumped his guns on the front lawn and left the house open. They left a note: "Nothing found. ATF."
In "The Silence of the Lambs," Thomas Harris has Clarice Starling remind a fellow fed that the local LEOs follow their lead as far as how to conduct themselves. So true.
The 4th Amendment specifically forbids "unreasonable searches and seizures".
I've been preaching to fellow officers for years that a reasonable search can degenerate into an unreasonable search if the suspected person's property rights are totally disrespected.
The sheriff and his minions should be liable for all of Jeanette Spangler's damages.
[W3]
"I was devastated," Spangler said Friday. "I didn't think that law enforcement could come out to somebody's place and do something like that. It's horrible."
"It's not the way we're supposed to be operating in the United States of America."
=======
Gosh, really? This sadly happens all too often in America.
At least they are (still) fighting back.
For everyone interested, here is the court opinion:
Spangler v. Wenninger, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 16395, 2010 FED App. 0483N (6th Cir. August 6, 2010)
Excerpt:
Photographs of the property following the search show that the property was left in complete disarray with piles of dirt placed all over Plaintiffs’ vehicles and property. While Defendants claim that they had no choice but to pile dirt on Plaintiffs’ personal property, there was evidence that there were other areas of the property where the dirt or personal property could have been placed. Defendants could have sought to expand the search warrant to allow for the placement of the extracted dirt in these other areas, but they did not. They have failed to identify any exigent circumstances that explain their failure to do so although Plaintiffs’ two-acre property could have easily accommodated this. Wenninger was at the site on several occasions, operating a Bobcat and piling dirt on Plaintiffs’ property. The officers were aware that doing this would damage Plaintiffs’ property. Additionally, Defendants failed to fill the hole that they dug during the search, leaving a hole that was up to fifteen feet deep in the garage that became filled with water. Defendants fail to explain why they did not fill the hole, and merely argue that they believed that they were not required to do so. However, Wenninger testified that the officers were aware that the hole could become filled with water upon conclusion of the search. The totality of the circumstances did not warrant the knowing destruction of Plaintiffs’ personal property by unnecessarily piling dirt on it, and failing to fill the large hole that remained in the garage. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving parties in this case, Plaintiffs, we find that genuine issues of material fact remain concerning the reasonableness of Defendants’ conduct here.
III. CONCLUSION
For the aforementioned reasons, we AFFIRM the district court’s determination that
Defendants are not entitled to immunity as a matter of law on Plaintiffs’ federal or state law claims against them.
It may take a while but the chances of Spangler recovering damages is pretty good.
[W3]
"complete disarray with piles of dirt placed all over Plaintiffs’ vehicles and property."
I didn't know that part.
A clear statement about where citizens rank in relation to cops.
Typically, the department's web page speaks of respect and caring and doing much with the little money they get.
Post a Comment