Swat raid Kansas home. Couple spends $25k to find out why.

[KC native]

Originally Posted by hometeam

I get the sentiment, but im talking about real life situation. There is no chance pot ends up in a trashcan unless some mom has confiscated it from her 16 year old, and even then you know the kid or his buddies would scoop it right back out~

They can use stems, seeds (if you're one of the neanderthals still smoking brick weed), and very small remnants that might get brushed into a trash can as grounds for a search warrant.

[Chief Roundup]

Of course they are in Kansas after all.

[philfree]

Don't they have to have a warrant to enter a home like this?

[MahiMike]

Meanwhile, 1 state away they toke in the streets. Interesting times in this country.

[Ragged Robin]

They do SWAT raids for (suspected) marijuana? tax dollars at work.. real dangerous substance there

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Ragged Robin

They do SWAT raids for marijuana?

Of course they do. It's EVIL!

[jiveturkey]

KS is going full on crazy with regards to police policy...

Kansas House Bill Aims To Prevent Anonymous Complaints Against Police

http://www.ibtimes.com/kansas-house-...police-1562385

A two-page legislation viewed as a bill legalizing police retaliation has been introduced in a Kansas House committee and will probably have some residents thinking twice about filing complaints of misconduct against law enforcement officials.

If House Bill 2698 is enacted into law, anonymous complaints against police officers will no longer be acceptable. Moreover, how law enforcement agencies conduct internal investigations could change.

The bill, which was introduced by the House Committee on Corrections and Juvenile Justice, would require that members of the public sign a sworn affidavit to acknowledge that they would be subject to criminal prosecution if their complaint proves false. But that’s not all: the officer being accused won’t be required to answer questions pertaining to the complaint until s/he is given a copy of the document and the related evidence. If no evidence of misconduct is found, then another law enforcement agency won't be allowed to open a separate investigation into the complaint.

Yet, the bill states that nothing contained in it should “discourage legitimate complaints or prevent a law enforcement agency from investigating a complaint made against a law enforcement officer.” Representatives from the committee didn't respond to a request for an interview.

Under the state’s current law, enforcement agencies are required to review all complaints, even anonymous ones. The proposed legislation is already being dubbed a “legalize police retaliation” measure and is being opposed by law enforcement officers and members of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the Wichita Eagle reports.

The newspaper said that Sedgwick County Sheriff Jeff Easter and other law enforcement officials have told lawmakers in the House Transportation and Public Safety Budget Committee that such a legislation would not only obstruct their ability to conduct internal investigations but also raise the level of public distrust for police.

“The sheriff’s office investigates numerous criminal cases, and we do not provide these materials to the interviewee prior the interview,” Easter said. “Thus I do not believe in providing deputies with evidence prior to the interview on alleged misconduct.”

Attorney Sean McCauley, who represents both the Kansas State Troopers Association and the Kansas chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police, testified on behalf of the proposal, saying that the bill isn’t shielding “bad cops,” just “protecting good cops from bad complaints.”

In the eyes of some attorneys outside the state, House Bill 2698 is simply bad policy.

Mike Nisperos, a retired state and federal attorney who has served on both sides of the courtroom in Guam, the U.S. mainland, and in the military, said after reading the bill that its clear purpose is to discourage people from filing complaints.

Nisperos said sworn affidavits aren’t required to initiate a murder investigation or any other criminal investigation. They also aren’t needed to take adverse administrative actions against other civil servants and aren’t required against members of the military “who have a much more dangerous job than the cop on the street,” he added.

Critics of the bill argue that government policies should encourage the public to weed out public servants who aren’t performing up to standard.

“While police officers can have danger in their jobs that does not mean they should have unusual protections against the criticisms of the communities they serve,” said Nisperos, who has served as director of the Oakland Citizens’ Police Review Board. “The thin blue line seems to be getting wider and wider when politicians allow themselves to be dominated and intimidated by police unions. They begin to look more like organized crime-controlled Teamster unions.

“Filing false complaints should be discouraged but not by a means that has a chilling effect on those who would file legitimate complaints,” he added.

Citizen-funded news website Kansas Exposed has reported that some individuals in Wichita already fear making complaints to their police department.

[Gonzo]

Originally Posted by jiveturkey

KS is going full on crazy with regards to police policy...

Kansas House Bill Aims To Prevent Anonymous Complaints Against Police

http://www.ibtimes.com/kansas-house-...police-1562385

A two-page legislation viewed as a bill legalizing police retaliation has been introduced in a Kansas House committee and will probably have some residents thinking twice about filing complaints of misconduct against law enforcement officials.

If House Bill 2698 is enacted into law, anonymous complaints against police officers will no longer be acceptable. Moreover, how law enforcement agencies conduct internal investigations could change.

The bill, which was introduced by the House Committee on Corrections and Juvenile Justice, would require that members of the public sign a sworn affidavit to acknowledge that they would be subject to criminal prosecution if their complaint proves false. But that’s not all: the officer being accused won’t be required to answer questions pertaining to the complaint until s/he is given a copy of the document and the related evidence. If no evidence of misconduct is found, then another law enforcement agency won't be allowed to open a separate investigation into the complaint.

Yet, the bill states that nothing contained in it should “discourage legitimate complaints or prevent a law enforcement agency from investigating a complaint made against a law enforcement officer.” Representatives from the committee didn't respond to a request for an interview.

Under the state’s current law, enforcement agencies are required to review all complaints, even anonymous ones. The proposed legislation is already being dubbed a “legalize police retaliation” measure and is being opposed by law enforcement officers and members of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the Wichita Eagle reports.

The newspaper said that Sedgwick County Sheriff Jeff Easter and other law enforcement officials have told lawmakers in the House Transportation and Public Safety Budget Committee that such a legislation would not only obstruct their ability to conduct internal investigations but also raise the level of public distrust for police.

“The sheriff’s office investigates numerous criminal cases, and we do not provide these materials to the interviewee prior the interview,” Easter said. “Thus I do not believe in providing deputies with evidence prior to the interview on alleged misconduct.”

Attorney Sean McCauley, who represents both the Kansas State Troopers Association and the Kansas chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police, testified on behalf of the proposal, saying that the bill isn’t shielding “bad cops,” just “protecting good cops from bad complaints.”

In the eyes of some attorneys outside the state, House Bill 2698 is simply bad policy.

Mike Nisperos, a retired state and federal attorney who has served on both sides of the courtroom in Guam, the U.S. mainland, and in the military, said after reading the bill that its clear purpose is to discourage people from filing complaints.

Nisperos said sworn affidavits aren’t required to initiate a murder investigation or any other criminal investigation. They also aren’t needed to take adverse administrative actions against other civil servants and aren’t required against members of the military “who have a much more dangerous job than the cop on the street,” he added.

Critics of the bill argue that government policies should encourage the public to weed out public servants who aren’t performing up to standard.

“While police officers can have danger in their jobs that does not mean they should have unusual protections against the criticisms of the communities they serve,” said Nisperos, who has served as director of the Oakland Citizens’ Police Review Board. “The thin blue line seems to be getting wider and wider when politicians allow themselves to be dominated and intimidated by police unions. They begin to look more like organized crime-controlled Teamster unions.

“Filing false complaints should be discouraged but not by a means that has a chilling effect on those who would file legitimate complaints,” he added.

Citizen-funded news website Kansas Exposed has reported that some individuals in Wichita already fear making complaints to their police department.

No shit? What a "shocker" there. Lol
I got ticketed for window tint in Butler county about 13 years ago , took it to court and won. The sheriff followed me out and threatened me with harassment if I ever drove thru Augusta again. I told him I had no plans to drive through there again and that he could goose-step his troops all over someone else.

We had an issue in Sarpy County a few years ago when a reporter tried doing an anonymous complaint. The cops actually locked his ass up when he refused to give them his name.
People retired after that one.

[Bweb]

This was the first thing I thought of.........

[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by jiveturkey

KS is going full on crazy with regards to police policy...

Kansas House Bill Aims To Prevent Anonymous Complaints Against Police

http://www.ibtimes.com/kansas-house-...police-1562385

A two-page legislation viewed as a bill legalizing police retaliation has been introduced in a Kansas House committee and will probably have some residents thinking twice about filing complaints of misconduct against law enforcement officials.

If House Bill 2698 is enacted into law, anonymous complaints against police officers will no longer be acceptable. Moreover, how law enforcement agencies conduct internal investigations could change.

The bill, which was introduced by the House Committee on Corrections and Juvenile Justice, would require that members of the public sign a sworn affidavit to acknowledge that they would be subject to criminal prosecution if their complaint proves false. But that’s not all: the officer being accused won’t be required to answer questions pertaining to the complaint until s/he is given a copy of the document and the related evidence. If no evidence of misconduct is found, then another law enforcement agency won't be allowed to open a separate investigation into the complaint.

Yet, the bill states that nothing contained in it should “discourage legitimate complaints or prevent a law enforcement agency from investigating a complaint made against a law enforcement officer.” Representatives from the committee didn't respond to a request for an interview.

Under the state’s current law, enforcement agencies are required to review all complaints, even anonymous ones. The proposed legislation is already being dubbed a “legalize police retaliation” measure and is being opposed by law enforcement officers and members of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the Wichita Eagle reports.

The newspaper said that Sedgwick County Sheriff Jeff Easter and other law enforcement officials have told lawmakers in the House Transportation and Public Safety Budget Committee that such a legislation would not only obstruct their ability to conduct internal investigations but also raise the level of public distrust for police.

“The sheriff’s office investigates numerous criminal cases, and we do not provide these materials to the interviewee prior the interview,” Easter said. “Thus I do not believe in providing deputies with evidence prior to the interview on alleged misconduct.”

Attorney Sean McCauley, who represents both the Kansas State Troopers Association and the Kansas chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police, testified on behalf of the proposal, saying that the bill isn’t shielding “bad cops,” just “protecting good cops from bad complaints.”

In the eyes of some attorneys outside the state, House Bill 2698 is simply bad policy.

Mike Nisperos, a retired state and federal attorney who has served on both sides of the courtroom in Guam, the U.S. mainland, and in the military, said after reading the bill that its clear purpose is to discourage people from filing complaints.

Nisperos said sworn affidavits aren’t required to initiate a murder investigation or any other criminal investigation. They also aren’t needed to take adverse administrative actions against other civil servants and aren’t required against members of the military “who have a much more dangerous job than the cop on the street,” he added.

Critics of the bill argue that government policies should encourage the public to weed out public servants who aren’t performing up to standard.

“While police officers can have danger in their jobs that does not mean they should have unusual protections against the criticisms of the communities they serve,” said Nisperos, who has served as director of the Oakland Citizens’ Police Review Board. “The thin blue line seems to be getting wider and wider when politicians allow themselves to be dominated and intimidated by police unions. They begin to look more like organized crime-controlled Teamster unions.

“Filing false complaints should be discouraged but not by a means that has a chilling effect on those who would file legitimate complaints,” he added.

Citizen-funded news website Kansas Exposed has reported that some individuals in Wichita already fear making complaints to their police department.

That is insane.

[Gonzo]

They didn't find jack shit in the trash, I doubt they even looked.

[Chief Roundup]

Wow and you people want to make fun of other states.

[Beef Supreme]

And when a homeowner reacts to the large men waving guns and yelling as they bust down the door, the cops shoot him, and the cops here on CP tell me how it was justified because they feared for their life.

[philfree]

Originally Posted by BigChiefTablet

And when a homeowner reacts to the large men waving guns and yelling as they bust down the door, the cops shoot him, and the cops here on CP tell me how it was justified because they feared for their life.

They would have been within their rights to kill every cop that entered their home. It wouldn't have turned out very good for'em but they would have been within their rights.


Truth is that at any time the authority's can jerk any one of us out of our lives and do what ever they want to us with no recourse. We're free just as long as we don't get to far out of line.

[KC native]

Originally Posted by philfree

They would have been within their rights to kill every cop that entered their home. It wouldn't have turned out very good for'em but they would have been within their rights.


Truth is that at any time the authority's can jerk any one of us out of our lives and do what ever they want to us with no recourse. We're free just as long as we don't get to far out of line.

Totally incorrect. The second they identify themselves (like when they say "Police! Search Warrant!" as they break down the door), you have no right to start shooting.