E'ville SWAT raids innocent grandma after neighbor uses her wireless [VIDEO]

[rambone]

Video has finally surfaced of the infamous Evansville, Indiana, raid on Louise Milan. She suspected of using the internet to go on a discussion forum and trash-talk threats toward the local police. In response, a SWAT team breached her doors and windows in a violent search for electronic evidence. They broke numerous doors and windows, even used a battering ram to shatter a glass storm door. They tossed multiple concussion grenades throughout the house, causing 68-year-old Louise to think "the world was ending."

She and her 18-year-old adopted daughter, Stephanie, were the only ones in the house, and both had rifles pointed at them before they were handcuffed and paraded before the neighborhood. Neither of them had anything to do with the internet posts.

Stephanie was found cowering on the floor next to a sofa. "Don't hurt me," she begged, staring down the barrel of an officer's rifle.

The home was targeted because the family's unsecured wireless internet signal had been used remotely by a neighbor from his parents' house.

Indiana grandmother suffers violent SWAT raid after a neighbor uses her wireless internet

 

[rambone]

Interestingly, both the plaintiffs and defendants believe the video helps their case. The Milans believe the video shows officers acting negligently and violating their constitutional rights, and the government believes the officers were shown to be “respectful” to the women — after pointing rifles at them and breaking their stuff.


[video=youtube;ZXqbLzHd_oo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXqbLzHd_oo[/video]

 

[Destro]

I can't believe they did all this without a search warrant

 

[Classic]

They gotta use all that gear and training for something........

 

[Bunnykid68]

Dupe

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...nt-peoples-house-here-evansville-indiana.html

 

[srad]

August 12 article from the Evansville Courier and Press:
City seeks favorable ruling in SWAT incident lawsuit; police video shows what happened - story

Note "city attorneys argued the force used was 'objectively reasonable' and that officials are immune from liability."

THIS HAS GOT TO CHANGE. If soldiers... er, I mean officers... and brass and departments and judges who issue these kinds of no-knock warrants know that they could be liable for gross negligence and general a**hattery, they'd likely tone down the Call of Duty mindset and antics.

Whatever happened to stake-outs, surveillance, and proper issuance of warrants.

I laughed a 7:45 when they cuffed grandma saying, "This is for our safety." The old lady looks to be about 4'10" and scared out of her wits.

Hope she gets a million bucks and the EPD chief or whoever authorized this raid gets a boot in the arse on his way out. Yeah, wishful thinking.

 

[rambone]

I can't believe they did all this without a search warrant

They had a search warrant. This wasn't a rogue operation. This is standard operating procedure.

 

[rambone]

“I think they could have handled it…different,” Louise said in a deposition. “There were bicycles for toddlers lying in my backyard. There were three bicycles lying right there by my back gate… There’s a Fisher Price car seat, toddler seat, sitting right there on my front porch, and it was there that day. And like it didn’t seem to matter.”

 

[Destro]

They had a search warrant. This wasn't a rouge operation. This is standard operating procedure.

Right, so where do the constitutional violations come in?

The police were there to arrest someone who communicated threats against police and their children from that house, and was known to be armed and was also thought to be the leader of a local gang.

 

[Mr Evilwrench]

One of these times they're going to bust into someone's house face to face with a .308 and have the wind taken out of their sails. This plow in first and never ask any questions thing vs taking a few minutes to do a little research and maybe have a quick chat with the subject, is going to start costing the departments as much as it's costing their hapless victims. Haven't these thugs ever heard of de-escalation? I know I sure have.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Right, so where do the constitutional violations come in?

The police were there to arrest someone who communicated threats against police and their children from that house, and was known to be armed and was also thought to be the leader of a local gang.

Not from that house.

 

[rambone]

Right, so where do the constitutional violations come in?

The lawsuit cites Article 1, Sections 11 and 23 of the Indiana constitution; the 4th and 14th Amendment of the Federal constitution; unreasonable and/or excessive force; reckless, intentional, and malicious actions; unreasonable search and seizure of her home; negligent training and supervision; failure to properly investigate; callous indifference to the rights of the Plaintiff; wrongful arrest; unlawful detainment; inter alia.

 

[Destro]

have a quick chat with the subject

"Excuse me sir, a moment of your time, are you the gentlemen who wishes to blow me and my family up with explosives?"

 

[Destro]

Not from that house.

yes they did, just without the homeowners knowledge.

 

[Destro]

The lawsuit cites Article 1, Sections 11 and 23 of the Indiana constitution; the 4th and 14th Amendment of the Federal constitution; unreasonable and/or excessive force; reckless, intentional, and malicious actions; unreasonable search and seizure of her home; negligent training and supervision; failure to properly investigate; callous indifference to the rights of the Plaintiff; wrongful arrest; unlawful detainment; inter alia.

ROFL

 

[rambone]

Uh... I'll be here all night folks...

 

[Fargo]

yes they did, just without the homeowners knowledge.

One might think the officers might have looked at an in car laptop to see if that ip addy was on an unsecured network, but then again one would be wrong.

 

[Bunnykid68]

yes they did, just without the homeowners knowledge.

That person was never in that house.

 

[Destro]

That person was never in that house.

your point is?

 

[Fargo]

your point is?

If the ip addy had come back to Starbucks, would they have still have punched the door?

If the cops are going to base a warrant of an IP addy, I think it is basic due diligence to see if it is a router on an public network. But then again, maybe I'm expecting too much?