ex·i·gent circumstances
An exigent circumstance, in the American law of criminal procedure, allows law enforcement to enter a structure without a warrant, or if they have a "knock and announce" warrant, without knocking and waiting for refusal under certain circumstances. .... More » [from Wikipedia] AND
["But they had the wrong guy. The drug courier was in another apartment. Hollis King may have been breaking the law, but he was minding his own business, on his own premises, and only became a suspect after the police had made their mistake."]* BUT: The police at the hard knock of the door, Could Not Know they had the wrong guy, until they entered the home; but did know who they had followed this same apartment building.
["But Justice Sam Alito, writing for the 8-1 majority, said, in effect, So what?"] No. He said what he said: ["He wrote: "The Kentucky Supreme Court held that the exigent circumstances rule does not apply in the case at hand because the police should have foreseen that their conduct would prompt the occupants to attempt to destroy evidence. We reject this interpretation"] -- since King could have simply ignored the knock at the door, or could have opened his door and declined to answer any questions.]".
Be sure you have ALL information with correct definition of important concepts like "exigent circumstances"; and the reason 'exigent' word Must be used. Otherwise, any suspect person, followed by police; and then interrupted as cause occurs, must be OK to act for the suspect. Remember probable cause... and the word "unreasonable" in the 4th. Here is Mr. Webster's, 1828 American Dic. definition: "2. Exceeding the bounds of reason; claiming or insisting on more than is fit; as an unreasonable demand.". 'Bounds of reason' were not exceeded.
["But Justice Sam Alito, writing for the 8-1 majority, said, in effect, So what?"] No. He said what he said: ["He wrote: "The Kentucky Supreme Court held that the exigent circumstances rule does not apply in the case at hand because the police should have foreseen that their conduct would prompt the occupants to attempt to destroy evidence. We reject this interpretation"] -- since King could have simply ignored the knock at the door, or could have opened his door and declined to answer any questions.]".
Here is 'probable cause': "probable cause is the standard by which an officer or agent of the law has the grounds to make an arrest, to conduct a personal or property search, or to obtain a warrant for arrest, etc. when criminal charges are being considered. It also has standards before a judge will issue a warrant.
No harm - No foul on the Supreme Court Justices on this one. The opposition to the search and seizure is the extreme side of example of OK to do wrong... as long as you can get away with it...which is the argument in this specific case. In other words, the path isn't "unreasonable"; but Not acceptable for suspect to take responsibility of the reason the suspect 'person' is having his door knocked-on... in the first place.
*quotes with brackets are from "Giving too much license to cops" by Michael A. Walsh in New York Post; 5/27/2011.
And are also a response to Judge Napolitano [whom I rarely disagree], but having heard Justice Ginsburg question the Snyder attorney in the Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder case, I immediately watch-out and look for the 'red herring' involved. Both Scotus are audible and downloadable. Listen for yourselves!
It is easy, especially with limited knowledge, of the wisdom and knowledge - like Proverbs and Jesus, of the Constitution's content; to make leaps just like this one about the 4th. But watch-out, for there are much more important attacks against the Constitution going on daily here in Sacramento and in the Administration of Obama-Soros-cohorts; that won't reach the courts, or may not be heard with the "Declaration of Constitutional Principles" violated! Unless, we can teach and instruct our "elected-We the People" to challenge in court; and respect that when there is no drums to play in an orchestra planning to play Beethoven's 5th; then there is no Beethoven's 5th ["dum-bum-dee-bum, bum-bum-dee-bum" for those who don't know this opening part]. That relates to Article I:1 ".. a Congress" which is also defined in 1828 Dic. in very musical terms...because: In a Republic - the voice of one person is important. When that voice is absent from the Bill, Act, Statute - that it cannot proceed for signature to law. There is no "concert of measures for the common good". The drums do not represent the greater number of instruments in the orchestra; but there is no Beethoven's 5th without them!
There is no law, when the minority party refuses to sign onto the opinion of the majority. Minority and Majority do not refer to number, but to the constitutional principle of "capacity to compete with others for the means to exercise the natural rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, and the capacity to regulate its competitive actions to avoid depriving others of those rights and.." with the Biblical "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." and much more. The reason Not to increase the "debt ceiling law"; The Dream Act, The "America's Financial Stability Act", most of the Regulations formulated by the 1300 Agencies and Departments under the Czars of this Administration; and the Administration's acts of spending beyond the history of mankind on this globe---any nation-, are all examples of the violation of sovereignty of person -- of person as corp. business --- of State --- of this Nation, as well as many other Nations held under the despotism of demand government; and those who aspire to borderless Nations and Jurisprudence.
This is what Ithis 'person' wants to Teach Everyone. Yes, "We the People" can make judgments and decisions, given information --- else: Do you really need a judge and attorney to read The Bible? The persons, nations, parables, laws, Psalms, and virtually every part of The Bible -- is meant to be used Today, Tomorrow, and Forever. The Bible with The Book of Mormon with The Declaration and The Constitution are all the work of Jesus Christ through the many "Persons" great and small who gave, live, lived and will live for His word with God for Life, Liberty, Happiness and with Obedience to The Father, His Son, and Our Holy Ghost. The magnificence of these relationships to 'doing right' because one person is important one at a time with Our God and every person related to continuing His Teaching and Labors on our behalf....including the Crucifixion of His Son. That, in itself, an example of government...washing...for number of people. Only Their Magnificence could create such a world for physical homo sapiens with much more important "temporal soul".
