Suspect Arrested in Murder of Burleson County Deputy

[JP171]

In a true high risk no knock none of you will fight back because you will be stunned out of your sleep by flash bangs and possibly gas. A real entry like that is used on armed and dangerous subjects. I doubt that was the case here. Having seen attorneys flat out lie for their clients I don't often believe them. The facts will come out and from what I've seen the sheriff was tight lipped for the integrity of the investigation.

texas needs to change some of the laws that regulate drugs, especially weed. I'd be curious to see stats in five years from CO and WA to see if legalizing weed makes a difference. I have NEVER fought a person on weed but have fought and even had to shoot an armed person on alcohol. As obummer said its time for a change.

gee hmmmm some of us have been trained how to mitigate those effects, and yep bad things happen to the entrants so you really need to stop thinking that because your an civilian LEO that your all that. no knocks are bad news and people die, please don't be one of them. As far as Lies well lets just remind you that the accused perp isn't the only one telling parables out of church. Also right now you are proving and furthering the us vs them mentality. I am responding to the current perceived tenor of your adamancy in your responses, I say the afore because I have found you to be a normally reasonable guy, but here I think that something is making you act abnormally.

As many have said here military weapons have no place in civilian hands and flashbangs need to be put back in the box, they hurt people sometimes kill them indiscriminately and gas needs to be restricted in its use to very limited situations and NEVER by civilians specially in either mass casualty or very restricted locations. I disagree with the widespread and uncontrolled use of military grade weapons by civilians and no not meaning small arms.

I do apologize if I have offended anyone, it was not my intention to do so, but rather to make a point

See once again a post about my point of view is made personal......nothing more to say

TJ, yes you are entitled to your opinion, but then so are we. We disagree on validity of method and from information we have available to us the method was at fault rather than a single person, officer or arrested subject. If you think I was attacking personally I apologize to you sir, it was not my intention to personally attack you but rather to disagree with the conclusion you reached and the methodology by which you reached it. If it is found that the no knock was actually needed then I will go with that and the subject should indeed be found guilty, should the no knock be found to have been an over zealous tactic and an officer lost his life then the current subject needs to be found not guilty and the person or persons responsible should be held properly and truly accountable(not just a letter of reprimand in the file). Yes I do agree that the story is very short on facts but I don't automatically assume that the Law Enforcement Agency is correct and faultless, this is what I have a problem with, that belief of infallibility of the agency and the information provided to the Judge/Magistrate. Being as we are all human and subject to being wrong or just full of stuffing this needs to be further checked before railing against a person who by his statements was defending his home. This is especially true with no forthcoming information of the warrant from the agency that was acting upon it, whom the deceased officer worked for. I do realize that there are occasions that necessitate that the information be held as to not compromise the prosecution's case but with what has happened I cannot see where at this time that would be beneficial in reality as the whole case is now a cluster, the original case is gone and a new case has superseded what was

[jmra]

This is pretty simple to me. The suspect should not be legally responsible for the officers death if the following two statements are true:
1. He could legally own the firearm used in the shooting.
2. He was unaware that the person/s entering his home were law enforcement conducting a legal search of the home.

I'll tell you why, with the little information we currently have, why I believe #2 is a true statement. You ready? The suspect is not only still alive, apparently he was not even injured.
Why didn't the other officers return fire immediately? If the suspect was intent on killing cops why wasn't he immediately perforated by the other officers?
I guess there could be more than one explanation this guy is still alive and unscathed, but one seems to be the most obvious. Immediately after shooting the first officer he complied with all of the commands the remaining officers issued. Does this sound like the actions of a cop killer, or the actions of someone who thought they were defending their family against a home invasion?

I could use the line "I will reserve judgement until we have more information", but I prefer the line "innocent until proven guilty".

[03Lightningrocks]

I'm pretty sure we have the right to defend ourselves against police officers in certain circumstances. I could have sworn that came up in my CHL class.

Contrary to the opinion posted above, a no knock into my home would result in a shoot out. My bedroom is upstairs and coming in downstairs would give me more than ample time to react. The only question would be how long it takes them to kill me. Screaming police as you smash into my house isn't enough proof for this law abiding citizen. My first thought would be that a gang of thugs were scamming me.

If I were a criminal, I would probably think cops. Since I do nothing illegal, not so much.

[jmra]

I'm pretty sure we have the right to defend ourselves against police officers in certain circumstances. I could have sworn that came up in my CHL class.

Contrary to the opinion posted above, a no knock into my home would result in a shoot out. My bedroom is upstairs and coming in downstairs would give me more than ample time to react. The only question would be how long it takes them to kill me. Screaming police as you smash into my house isn't enough proof for this law abiding citizen. My first thought would be that a gang of thugs were scamming me.

If I were a criminal, I would probably think cops. Since I do nothing illegal, not so much.

with everything you just stated. If I said something contrary to your post then I did not properly convey my thoughts.

[mojo84]

It would be nice if we could know if they did a no-knock entry or just how they approached serving the warrant. From the couple of articles I read, I am not sure how this particular entry went down. Did they just storm in? Did they knock and then storm in? Did they knock and he started shooting?

It would be good for the Sheriff's office to release some details and explain what their reason was to utilize a no-knock entry if in fact that is what they did.

[VMI77]

There were two marijuana plants plus a couple seedlings in the house "for personal use". Regardless how one feels about the "war on drugs" or no-knock warrants, I think we'd all agree that they are not worth a man's life, nor are they worth totally destroying the homeowner's life. The question needs to be asked if there was a more effective and safer way to serve these kinds of warrants.

This. The whole "war on drugs" has become nothing more than a Constitution wrecking absurdity. And like gun laws, it's especially absurd when what is permissible or lightly punished in one state (such as the use of marijuana) is an issue of life or death in another state. What is truly criminal is to waste a life over something so trivial as a few marijuana plants.

[VMI77]

[As much as it pains me to admit this, the war on drugs has been an absolute failure. I'm not in favor of legalizing any, much less all, drugs, but 50 years of doing the same thing is proof enough that it isn't working. Don't ask me for a solution, I don't have one, but that's not justification to continue efforts that everyone admits don't work. Not only are current laws/policies/procedures ineffective, they are far too costly in terms of money and lives.

Chas.

I think one part of a solution is decriminalization. Treat consumption like a traffic violation with a non trivial fine. Treat distribution and "manufacture" as something like a major copyright violation, with fines and possible imprisonment in proportion to the size of the distributor or producer ---or, just seizure of all assets.

[VMI77]

I support the death penalty for cop killers.

As opposed to everyone else? I support the death penalty for all killers. For instance, I don't think the life of a cop is more valuable than the life of my son or my wife.

[Jumping Frog]

I'm pretty sure we have the right to defend ourselves against police officers in certain circumstances. I could have sworn that came up in my CHL class.

Contrary to the opinion posted above, a no knock into my home would result in a shoot out. My bedroom is upstairs and coming in downstairs would give me more than ample time to react. The only question would be how long it takes them to kill me. Screaming police as you smash into my house isn't enough proof for this law abiding citizen. My first thought would be that a gang of thugs were scamming me.

If I were a criminal, I would probably think cops. Since I do nothing illegal, not so much.

What you just described is the absolute nightmare scenario for a law-abiding, armed, homeowner. There is no winning in that scenario, just disaster.

Shoot cops coming through the door, does anyone not think that there will be criminal charges if you survive the encounter?

[CoffeeNut]

I'm pretty sure we have the right to defend ourselves against police officers in certain circumstances. I could have sworn that came up in my CHL class.

Contrary to the opinion posted above, a no knock into my home would result in a shoot out. My bedroom is upstairs and coming in downstairs would give me more than ample time to react. The only question would be how long it takes them to kill me. Screaming police as you smash into my house isn't enough proof for this law abiding citizen. My first thought would be that a gang of thugs were scamming me.

If I were a criminal, I would probably think cops. Since I do nothing illegal, not so much.

What you just described is the absolute nightmare scenario for a law-abiding, armed, homeowner. There is no winning in that scenario, just disaster.

Shoot cops coming through the door, does anyone not think that there will be criminal charges if you survive the encounter?

And if you do survive and are charged you'll lose the ensuing he said/cop said 99.99% of the time. No knocks aren't good for anyone, especially the homeowner on the receiving end of "justice".

[Charles L. Cotton]

Without imputing any ill-will on either LEOs or suspects, no-knock entries are inherently dangerous. Contrary to claims made supporting such entries, they do not increase safety for anyone involved in the broad sense, while they may increase officer safety in some very limited circumstances. The only time officer safety is increased is when the LEOs are facing a subject who is both willing and capable of killing a COP. Based upon the number of arrests of violent offenders who surrendered without a fight compared to those who go out fighting, the chance of encountering a COP-killing subject during warrant service is minimal. The risk to the subject (guilty or innocent) and bystanders is present in every no-knock entry.

For many people, the natural reaction to someone breaking into their home is to grab a firearm and defend themselves and their families. Since the majority of no-knock warrants are served when the subject is most likely to be asleep, they are designed to be employed precisely when the subject and bystanders are least capable of making a fully informed decision as to whether the persons entering are LEOs or an intruder. In very few situations is it possible to safely stun or incapacitate persons in a home at the time the LEOs make entry. Flash bangs are effective only if they are deployed relatively close to the subject and in the same room or in a room close by with little or no blast barrier. The flash part is completely ineffective on a sleeping person or one who is in another room and is not blinded/disoriented by the light. The smaller the home, apartment, trailer, the more likely a flash bang will be effective, but even then there are no guarantees. Releasing gas into a home as part of a no-knock entry should be unlawful, unless there is conclusive proof that the subject is violent and there is no one else in the home. While gas is considered to be a non-lethal weapon, it is quite deadly to millions of people who suffer with asthma, COPD and other severe respiratory diseases. Using gas prophetically is an unjustified risk.

While it is rare that LEOs hit the wrong house, it does happen. It is less rare that they hit the house of an innocent person based upon a false tip. Another Member has raised the issue of non-LEO intruders posing as LEOs serving warrants. Sadly, this is becoming increasingly common. Houston has had a rash of violent intruders kicking their way into homes wearing HPD "raid jackets" shouting "police." Homeowners are surrendering to people they believe are officers and are being assaulted, raped, robbed and killed. The knowledge of these events can easily come into play in a homeowner's decision to to defend against what they believe to be non-LEO attackers. As 03Lighteningrocks said, people who are criminals should reasonably believe that those entering really are the police, so it would be harder to claim that they "reasonably believed that deadly force was immediately necessary to prevent the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force." A person who is not a criminal would reasonably assume that it is not the police breaking into their home. No-knock entries remove the opportunity to make rational, well-informed decisions both by the homeowner and the LEO.

Regardless of goodwill exhibited and caution employed, no-knock entries are inherently dangerous to everyone involved and should be used on very rare occasions.

Chas.

[Robert*PPS]

I'm pretty sure we have the right to defend ourselves against police officers in certain circumstances. I could have sworn that came up in my CHL class.

Contrary to the opinion posted above, a no knock into my home would result in a shoot out. My bedroom is upstairs and coming in downstairs would give me more than ample time to react. The only question would be how long it takes them to kill me. Screaming police as you smash into my house isn't enough proof for this law abiding citizen. My first thought would be that a gang of thugs were scamming me.

If I were a criminal, I would probably think cops. Since I do nothing illegal, not so much.

What you just described is the absolute nightmare scenario for a law-abiding, armed, homeowner. There is no winning in that scenario, just disaster.

Shoot cops coming through the door, does anyone not think that there will be criminal charges if you survive the encounter?

We had a similar case like this in Lubbock a few years back. Officers responding to a burglary in progress started to enter the apartment of a 90 year old man, which was not the correct apartment. The cops said somebody had already broken out the 90 year old man's window before they arrived, which is why they approached it. At any rate, when they began to enter, the old man fired at them with a shotgun. He shot again and police returned fire wounding him. He was charged with two counts of agg. assault, but the grand jury declined to indict.

[SewTexas]

I'm pretty sure we have the right to defend ourselves against police officers in certain circumstances. I could have sworn that came up in my CHL class.

Contrary to the opinion posted above, a no knock into my home would result in a shoot out. My bedroom is upstairs and coming in downstairs would give me more than ample time to react. The only question would be how long it takes them to kill me. Screaming police as you smash into my house isn't enough proof for this law abiding citizen. My first thought would be that a gang of thugs were scamming me.

If I were a criminal, I would probably think cops. Since I do nothing illegal, not so much.

What you just described is the absolute nightmare scenario for a law-abiding, armed, homeowner. There is no winning in that scenario, just disaster.

Shoot cops coming through the door, does anyone not think that there will be criminal charges if you survive the encounter?

We had a similar case like this in Lubbock a few years back. Officers responding to a burglary in progress started to enter the apartment of a 90 year old man, which was not the correct apartment. The cops said somebody had already broken out the 90 year old man's window before they arrived, which is why they approached it. At any rate, when they began to enter, the old man fired at them with a shotgun. He shot again and police returned fire wounding him. He was charged with two counts of agg. assault, but the grand jury declined to indict.

good, if juries did this more often officers would be more careful and judges might sign fewer no knock warrants.

[mojo84]

I don't think juries not convicting would lessen the use of no-knock intrusions. Too many cops already have the attitude of "do what they want and let the DA, judges and juries sort it out.

The other aspect to this is that some, not all, cops become adrenaline junkies and thrive on the excitement of serving these types of warrants. I used to have a neighbor that worked for Austin PD that fit this to a T. He loved to tell me about his "fights" he had on 6th street with drunks.

Interesting thing, he is now a DEA agent.

[cb1000rider]

As much as it pains me to admit this, the war on drugs has been an absolute failure.

I'm not sure that's entirely true. If you ask the Cartels, the war on drugs is great for their business.

(I'm with you 100% - why do we continue policies that cost Billions of dollars and waste so many lives?)