Unlawful search and seizure!!

N

Nnobby45

New member
This from KABA. I haven't run across it before, so I don't think it's old stuff. In any event, it's rather disturbing. Especially when you hear the ruling of the Court.

"When San Luis Obispo County Sheriff’s Deputy Darren Murphy responded to a 'shots fired' call in April 2008, he decided en route that he was going to make an arrest."

"He did far more than that. Murphy and other deputies made an unwarranted entry into a home, and then into a locked gun safe. Murphy's uncensored, darkly disturbing observations and behavior following his Code-3 arrival at the rural home of longtime SLO County resident Matt Hart were picked up by Murphy's and other deputies’ own recorders. Those recordings provide a rare, frighteningly revealing, behind-the-scenes perspective of how one local law enforcement agency views the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and other laws its personnel are sworn to uphold." ...

http://www.kccn.tv/
 
Y

Young.Gun.612

New member
Oh my God, that is an egregious violation of his rights! I hope the NRA gets hilt deep in this one, I doubt Mr. Hart has the money to afford a high power attorney. Those a re some of the cockiest cops I've ever heard. And, when is discharging a firearm in an unincorporated part of town a crime?
 
U

USAFNoDak

New member
That whole system of justice in that county is scary from the cops to the county attorney to judge. The judge should have thrown the case out and had the cops arrested on the spot.
 
N

nate45

New member
If this goes before a jury in a civil trial, its hard to see how the county can prevail. What an egregious abuse of power. It does not make me angry so much as it does sad. :(
 
A

Aguila Blanca

Staff
Nnobby45 said:
This from KABA. I haven't run across it before, so I don't think it's old stuff. In any event, it's rather disturbing. Especially when you hear the ruling of the Court.
Click to expand...
It is at least two years old, and old enough that the defendant has already pled guilty to a misdemeanor and gotten some (but not all) of his guns back.
 
A

Al Norris

Moderator Emeritus
I apologize for jumping the gun and not doing the research prior to my closing the thread. After doing some more research on the subject matter, I've decided to reopen this thread.

It appears that there is an ongoing lawsuit. Most of the subjects firearms were recently (as in Wed.) returned due, in part, to the outcry of the videos being made public.
 
B

Brian Pfleuger

Moderator Emeritus
The most amazing part to me is that a police department would respond in that manner to "shots fired" out in the boon-docks. Where exactly are you supposed to be firing shots, if not there?

Truthfully, sadly, I don't think any of it surprises me. I have a number of LEO friends, so I'm not bashing LEOs, but we see an awful lot of this sort of mentality lately. Not around here, thank God.
 
B

bombmaster

New member
It is alleged that this was not a neighbor or friend that called 911 but a passer by. Probably someone from a large city that was frightened by the sound of gunfire. I had a customer and her little girl stop by my store some time back. When her father and I got on about a conversation about guns she looked at me and said "do you have guns?" I replied Yes. She said "are you a policeman?" I said no. She replied "oh then you must be a bad guy."

With this type of mentality going on in our schools its no wonder passer bys are freeked out. It wasn't that long ago when I brought my rifle to school so my shop teacher could help me clean up the action. What is this world coming to:mad:
 
G

Glenn Dee

New member
Ladies, and Gentlemen... here you see picture proof of the difference between law enforcement, and the police. The police answer to the people... I dont know who law enforcement answers to...


:barf:
 
A

azredhawk44

Moderator
Exigent Circumstances, 4th Amendment, and gun safes

http://www.kccn.tv/

Please watch the video on this site. A man was target shooting on his own rural land in San Luis Obispo in CA. The Sheriff's office responded to a "shots fired" call. The officers pre-judged the situation before even arriving (dashcam comments where they already decided that someone's going to jail).

The guy complies with them as they point M16's at him, and they go through his house. They see a locked gun safe.

They decide they want into the safe, and take the man's keys off of him while handcuffed, despite his deliberate objections and asking for justification for the search of the safe.

Officers get together and come up with an excuse after the fact and they settle on Exigent Circumstances. My understanding of exigent circumstances, is they can search a dwelling looking for victims, potential hazards, or threats to immediate officer safety.

I'm having a hard time understanding how a locked gun safe when a suspect is cuffed and under guard, poses a threat when no other persons are in the area.

They then seize the firearms after remarking on how much they like the guns (Mini-14, M1A, 1100 series shotgun, other stuff).

All of this makes me glad that my safe is a huge monster that requires special equipment to move, and has a very complicated combination lock and no key access.

This event happened two years ago and the man to my knowledge still doesn't have his guns back and there has been no repercussions to the officers. It strikes me as a violation of the 4th amendment.
 
S

sakeneko

New member
That happened along the California coast, not in Arizona, not surprisingly. :/ Has the guy sued? (I can't display the video for some reason -- I think the site has tracking stuff on it that my browser blocks, and that must be allowed to track if you want to view the video.)
 
B

Brian Pfleuger

Moderator Emeritus
The very fact that the officers take an action and then have to discuss the reasoning for it afterwards is a pretty sure indication that they're full of crap. Exigent circumstances would ordinarily leave little doubt for anyone that the actions were necessary. The entire video shows excess on the part of the police, beginning to end. There was no justification for anything that was done. Holding the guy at gunpoint, entering the house, even the lights and sirens in response to a "shots fired" call out in the wilderness.

Excessive in almost every way, beginning to end.
 
Last edited:
M

medalguy

New member
I hope this is confined to Kalifornia. Here in New Mexico I can step out my back door (I live in a remote area) and shoot all I want. I can hear my neighbors all up and down the valley shooting frequently.

If the police decided to respond to every call they might get about "shots fired" they would need 2 patrol cars just in our valley to respond. I may go out and shoot 3 or 4 times a week and some neighbors shoot almost daily. I guess it all depends on where you are located and how the police feel about guns in any given area. Here they are pretty cool about it.

Considering the location os San Luis Obispo, I suppose it's not surprising the LEO's reacted (over reacted) the way they did. Another reason NOT to want to live in Kalifornia.
 
D

dec41971

New member
Thank God for cameras and video tapes! Things people get away with are outrageous. We have laws, and they should apply to EVERYONE equally. Without the video evidence, I wouldn't be surprised they came up with worse charges and ruined this guy's life completely. Unfortunately when it comes to guns, you are going to get shafted because everyone thinks you got them in order to kill people like my ignorant friends say to me. Aaaaargh! :barf:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top