TexasCHLforum.com

Posted: **Sat Feb 16, 2013 11:11 pm**

Here's a Massachusetts man who shot a police officer and was never charged. Permit suspended in Ragsdale case Shooting of officer investigated

Mr. Ragsdale went on vacation. He gave his neighbor a key to his house and authority with the alarm company. He came home from vacation early, didn't tell his neighbor, set off the alarm, then turned it off and went to bed. The neighbor called 911. When the police arrived, the neighbor unlocked the door, let the police in and told them no one should be in the house. Mr. Ragsdale shot one of the officers as he was coming up the steps to the second story. The officers never announced themselves.

The two officers were let into Mr. Ragsdale’s home July 14 by a neighbor after they searched outside the residence. The neighbor, who had a key and was on the alarm company’s list of people to notify regarding the residence, told police Mr. Ragsdale was on vacation and that the home should be empty, according to police.

Police were unaware, however, that Mr. Ragsdale had reportedly come home and set off the alarm. The officers, who were in full uniform and arrived in a marked cruiser, noticed a dim light on the second floor and saw a shadowy figure, according to police. They entered the home to search the interior and Officer Rice was shot by Mr. Ragsdale, who was alone in the home, as he reached the second floor. Chief Sampson said Mr. Ragsdale’s wife and children were on vacation at the time.

The officers did not announce who they were and that they were entering the home. Such an announcement could be useful in certain circumstances, but could also give away an officer’s tactical advantage, depending on the situation, Chief Sampson said.

Ragsdale was never charged.

I'll bet the folks on this forum can point out several mistakes that were made, not least Mr. Ragsdale not informing his neighbor that he was home.

Posted: **Sat Feb 16, 2013 11:12 pm**

According to this posting (/viewtopic.php?f=94&t=62781&hilit=supreme&start=15#p770570), the Bad Elk decision from the US Supreme Court indicates that there is at least some chance that you could win it in court - but like other posters have said, the chance that you'll live to see court is quite small, indeed.

And no, I'm no lawyer.

Posted: **Sun Feb 17, 2013 12:51 am**

The most likely scenario for this is the no knock warrant one, where a mistake is made, the wrong house, bad info from an informant, etc.

This happened quite a few years ago here. The homeowner resident was severely wounded, and IIRC, the county wrote a check over it eventually. The confidential informant who furnished the info had apparently succumbed to pressure to give some useful info and made up a story about drug dealing in a house fitting that description.

There is almost no surviving these no-knock warrant raids. The police arrive with massive firepower, and any resistance whatsoever is eliminated very quickly, family dogs, homeowners etc.

I don't see any justification for these warrants myself, having heard the rationales offered and remaining unconvinced the game is worth the candle.

Posted: **Sun Feb 17, 2013 10:24 am**

DocV wrote:
goose wrote: ... While I have 99% love for LEO (1% disdain for LEO speeders without lights and unsignaled lane changers out writing tickets) ...
At one time I would have agreed with you about unlit LEO speeders and unsignaled lane changers. Then someone broke into our neighbor's house while she was grocery shopping. She ran crying to our house when she discovered her broken-in door. We 911'ed it and a bunch of unlit speeding swat LEOs surrounded her house. I would bet they worried not one nonce about signaling lane changes on the way over. Now I understand LEOs may need to get somewhere quickly and silently and have replaced my prior bad judgement with a new appreciation for what might be the reason for such actions.

SWAT for a burglar, that is scarier than a burglar and a waste of resources.

Posted: **Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:07 am**

suthdj wrote:
DocV wrote:
goose wrote: ... While I have 99% love for LEO (1% disdain for LEO speeders without lights and unsignaled lane changers out writing tickets) ...
At one time I would have agreed with you about unlit LEO speeders and unsignaled lane changers. Then someone broke into our neighbor's house while she was grocery shopping. She ran crying to our house when she discovered her broken-in door. We 911'ed it and a bunch of unlit speeding swat LEOs surrounded her house. I would bet they worried not one nonce about signaling lane changes on the way over. Now I understand LEOs may need to get somewhere quickly and silently and have replaced my prior bad judgement with a new appreciation for what might be the reason for such actions.
SWAT for a burglar, that is scarier than a burglar and a waste of resources.

SWAT teams are not on missions 24/7 each day. People forget they are LEO's first. Many times swat units are out working special details in uniform when nothing is going on to include patrol in some areas. Would you rather these on duty LEO's not respond? To me that would be a waste of resources.

Posted: **Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:08 am**

JALLEN wrote:The most likely scenario for this is the no knock warrant one, where a mistake is made, the wrong house, bad info from an informant, etc.

This happened quite a few years ago here. The homeowner resident was severely wounded, and IIRC, the county wrote a check over it eventually. The confidential informant who furnished the info had apparently succumbed to pressure to give some useful info and made up a story about drug dealing in a house fitting that description.

There is almost no surviving these no-knock warrant raids. The police arrive with massive firepower, and any resistance whatsoever is eliminated very quickly, family dogs, homeowners etc.

I don't see any justification for these warrants myself, having heard the rationales offered and remaining unconvinced the game is worth the candle.

Are you talking about the POWAY raid? That was the feds.

http://articles.latimes.com/1992-09-18/ ... _dea-agent" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:17 am**

suthdj wrote:
DocV wrote:
goose wrote: ... While I have 99% love for LEO (1% disdain for LEO speeders without lights and unsignaled lane changers out writing tickets) ...
At one time I would have agreed with you about unlit LEO speeders and unsignaled lane changers. Then someone broke into our neighbor's house while she was grocery shopping. She ran crying to our house when she discovered her broken-in door. We 911'ed it and a bunch of unlit speeding swat LEOs surrounded her house. I would bet they worried not one nonce about signaling lane changes on the way over. Now I understand LEOs may need to get somewhere quickly and silently and have replaced my prior bad judgement with a new appreciation for what might be the reason for such actions.
SWAT for a burglar, that is scarier than a burglar and a waste of resources.

Perhaps. Perhaps not. Slightly before this happened, a couple, who lived a few blocks away on the same major traffic artery, were found murdered in their home. They were victims of a home invasion. Sadly, the couple had called 911 on the same night before their demise. The police were still looking for the murderer(s) and the case remains unsolved.

Posted: **Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:31 am**

texanjoker wrote:
JALLEN wrote:The most likely scenario for this is the no knock warrant one, where a mistake is made, the wrong house, bad info from an informant, etc.

This happened quite a few years ago here. The homeowner resident was severely wounded, and IIRC, the county wrote a check over it eventually. The confidential informant who furnished the info had apparently succumbed to pressure to give some useful info and made up a story about drug dealing in a house fitting that description.

There is almost no surviving these no-knock warrant raids. The police arrive with massive firepower, and any resistance whatsoever is eliminated very quickly, family dogs, homeowners etc.

I don't see any justification for these warrants myself, having heard the rationales offered and remaining unconvinced the game is worth the candle.
Are you talking about the POWAY raid? That was the feds.

http://articles.latimes.com/1992-09-18/ ... _dea-agent" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's him. I had forgotten it was Feds, although that may be a distinction without a difference.

Good for you for remembering that. I tried searching to recall the details but Whatzizname's Disease flummoxed me.

Posted: **Sun Feb 17, 2013 1:23 pm**

texanjoker wrote:
suthdj wrote:
DocV wrote:
goose wrote: ... While I have 99% love for LEO (1% disdain for LEO speeders without lights and unsignaled lane changers out writing tickets) ...
At one time I would have agreed with you about unlit LEO speeders and unsignaled lane changers. Then someone broke into our neighbor's house while she was grocery shopping. She ran crying to our house when she discovered her broken-in door. We 911'ed it and a bunch of unlit speeding swat LEOs surrounded her house. I would bet they worried not one nonce about signaling lane changes on the way over. Now I understand LEOs may need to get somewhere quickly and silently and have replaced my prior bad judgement with a new appreciation for what might be the reason for such actions.
SWAT for a burglar, that is scarier than a burglar and a waste of resources.
SWAT teams are not on missions 24/7 each day. People forget they are LEO's first. Many times swat units are out working special details in uniform when nothing is going on to include patrol in some areas. Would you rather these on duty LEO's not respond? To me that would be a waste of resources.

Since I don't know how many responded other than the saying "a bunch of unlit speeding swat LEOs surrounded her house" I would venture to guess a "Bunch" is more then is needed to perform the action to clear a house, since some here do it with 1 chl holder.

Edited to add: this is a thread drift so won't respond along this topic again.

Posted: **Sun Feb 17, 2013 10:46 pm**

goose wrote:While I have 99% love for LEO (1% disdain for LEO speeders without lights and unsignaled lane changers out writing tickets) I am also happy to read that we at least are not required to just belly up and wait for them to stop.

Sec. 546.004. EXCEPTIONS TO SIGNAL REQUIREMENT.

[...]

(c) A police officer may operate an authorized emergency vehicle for a law enforcement purpose without using the audible or visual signals required by Section 546.003 if the officer is:
(1) responding to an emergency call or pursuing a suspected violator of the law with probable cause to believe that:
(A) knowledge of the presence of the officer will cause the suspect to:
(i) destroy or lose evidence of a suspected felony;
(ii) end a suspected continuing felony before the officer has obtained sufficient evidence to establish grounds for arrest; or
(iii) evade apprehension or identification of the suspect or the suspect's vehicle; or
(B) because of traffic conditions on a multilaned roadway, vehicles moving in response to the audible or visual signals may:
(i) increase the potential for a collision; or
(ii) unreasonably extend the duration of the pursuit; or
(2) complying with a written regulation relating to the use of audible or visible signals adopted by the local government that employs the officer or by the department.

Posted: **Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:50 am**

suthdj wrote:
texanjoker wrote:
suthdj wrote:
DocV wrote:
goose wrote: ... While I have 99% love for LEO (1% disdain for LEO speeders without lights and unsignaled lane changers out writing tickets) ...
At one time I would have agreed with you about unlit LEO speeders and unsignaled lane changers. Then someone broke into our neighbor's house while she was grocery shopping. She ran crying to our house when she discovered her broken-in door. We 911'ed it and a bunch of unlit speeding swat LEOs surrounded her house. I would bet they worried not one nonce about signaling lane changes on the way over. Now I understand LEOs may need to get somewhere quickly and silently and have replaced my prior bad judgement with a new appreciation for what might be the reason for such actions.
SWAT for a burglar, that is scarier than a burglar and a waste of resources.
SWAT teams are not on missions 24/7 each day. People forget they are LEO's first. Many times swat units are out working special details in uniform when nothing is going on to include patrol in some areas. Would you rather these on duty LEO's not respond? To me that would be a waste of resources.
Since I don't know how many responded other than the saying "a bunch of unlit speeding swat LEOs surrounded her house" I would venture to guess a "Bunch" is more then is needed to perform the action to clear a house, since some here do it with 1 chl holder.

Edited to add: this is a thread drift so won't respond along this topic again.

Please tell us the proper number of officers needed to clear a house.

Posted: **Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:53 am**

george wrote:Report this postReply with quoteRe: Shoot back at LEOs
by gigag04 » Sun Feb 17, 2013 10:46 pm

goose wrote:
While I have 99% love for LEO (1% disdain for LEO speeders without lights and unsignaled lane changers out writing tickets) I am also happy to read that we at least are not required to just belly up and wait for them to stop.

Sec. 546.004. EXCEPTIONS TO SIGNAL REQUIREMENT.

[...]

(c) A police officer may operate an authorized emergency vehicle for a law enforcement purpose without using the audible or visual signals required by Section 546.003 if the officer is:
(1) responding to an emergency call or pursuing a suspected violator of the law with probable cause to believe that:
(A) knowledge of the presence of the officer will cause the suspect to:
(i) destroy or lose evidence of a suspected felony;
(ii) end a suspected continuing felony before the officer has obtained sufficient evidence to establish grounds for arrest; or
(iii) evade apprehension or identification of the suspect or the suspect's vehicle; or
(B) because of traffic conditions on a multilaned roadway, vehicles moving in response to the audible or visual signals may:
(i) increase the potential for a collision; or
(ii) unreasonably extend the duration of the pursuit; or
(2) complying with a written regulation relating to the use of audible or visible signals adopted by the local government that employs the officer or by the department.

You forgot to add going to the doughnut shop. I actually observed this on the way to church. Cop was speeding, no signals, turns on his lights to blow through the red light, and then pulls into the doughnut shop. Of course, maybe there was a robbery in progress????

You're right, George. We should prohibit all LEOs from utilizing these powers because some have abused them. Same as banning all semi-auto rifles because some people use them illegally. The way to get rid of a few bad apples to to throw out the whole bunch.

/sarcasm

Posted: **Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:04 am**

gigag04 wrote:
goose wrote:While I have 99% love for LEO (1% disdain for LEO speeders without lights and unsignaled lane changers out writing tickets) I am also happy to read that we at least are not required to just belly up and wait for them to stop.

Roll your eyes. I can take the dig. Regulations stating that they may run without lights doesn't mean that they can always speed without lights. Gigag, I view you of a man of integrity. Do you honestly want me to believe that you know of none or see no other LEOs violating the laws I described without probable cause. That would appear a huge stretch to this outsider. That will be a tough sell to this guy.

Because I respect you I will also give the out that your team/city may be better than the patrol cars I see where I live.