Quote:
Originally Posted by TMI Guy
HomeWood, as a LEO, maybe you can answer some questions that I have.
1) When the tactical teams were going door-to-door in Watertown, did they need consent from the homeowners/occupants in order to enter the homes and conduct a search? If not, what exception to the 4th amendment applies in a situation such as this?
2) Was the shelter in place message from the governor (or whoever issued it) an order, or a request? If it was an order, under what authority (short of imposing martial law) can a government official order the citizens of a large city and four surrounding communities to stay inside? If citizens of Boston, Cambridge, Watertown, etc. had been found walking on the sidewalk yesterday, would they have been subject to arrest or detention?
These are not rhetorical questions. Without their ability to use 20/20 hindsight, I'm not surprised by the level of force that was brought to bear yesterday by the police and federal agencies. The suspects had already demonstrated the ability and willingness to kill and maim large numbers of innocent people, and nobody at the time knew if the remaining suspect (and possibly accomplices) had the capability to do even more. But, I don't think it's ever wrong to ask questions about how far our government can legally go in its efforts to protect those who have given their consent to be governed. The ends do not always justify the means.
|
1) They would need consent to search door to door in order to just check. I don't know of any law that allows a warrantless search without consent in this kind of scenario. No consent would be needed if a) an arrest warrant was active for suspect #2, and b) if there is probable cause to believe he is hiding or barracaded in one of those residences. Also, no consent is needed if in direct pursuit of a suspect who is running and they run into a house. That would be unbroken pursuit, not 30 mins later after the officer loses sight. After that a search warrant would be needed to search a desired private residence or building. Most residents probably didn't have much of a problem letting the teams of officers search (IMO), but gaining consent after strongly insisting isn't a violation of the 4th amendment.
I don't know what might change if something is considered a military operation or something like that. That's out of my league.
2) Sounded like more of a request than an order because there were many citizens out and about that I saw on TV and there was no word of them being arrested. If it was an enforceable order, I'm sure it would have been made very very clear at the press briefings. Obviously most people took the request seriously and abided by it, which was very helpful to the efforts of all the LE agencies working.
The efforts made yesterday by all LE agencies involved were normal and everyday police practices to find a wanted person, but just on a
much larger scale! Nobody bats an eye when a single neighborhood block is shut down to search for somebody, we do it all the time. Therefore, it looked unfamiliar and ok, concerning for some. This "massive power" has always existed. You saw numerous agencies working together outside of their jurisdictions, because of a thing called mutual aid. The outside agencies like Boston PD and NH State police, etc were cloaked under Watertown's police authority when officially requested to assist them (that's how NC works too. See the Dem Nat'l convention in Charlotte as an example). Feds and Mass Stateys obviously have jurisdition to begin with. This person is/was extremely dangerous and if the precautions taken for him were not done and another person was hurt or worse.....then what?