Police deliver drugs to Mayor, break down door, kill pet dogs

Trancendental

CAGiversary!
Feedback
4 (100%)
The detective seemed crestfallen, Georgia said. Georgia, who had been moved, still bound, into the downstairs bedroom, says she overheard the woman saying something like: "It's my first raid, and we got the mayor's house."
Cheye, struggling to understand, pieced together questions officers asked him and comments he overheard. Narcotics investigators for the Prince George's police had apparently left that white box on his front step, then sent SWAT officers from the Sheriff's Office to retrieve it. The box contained marijuana. Officers from the two county law enforcement agencies had apparently been parked watching his house all day. Yet they had apparently done so little investigatory work -- they hadn't even taken 30 seconds to Google Cheye -- that they didn't know they were launching a paramilitary attack on an elected official's home until after they'd broken down the door and shot the dogs. Cheye was particularly disturbed when he discovered that narcotics investigators seemed to have known that criminals had been mailing drugs addressed to innocent people, in hopes of intercepting the packages before the addressees claimed them.
Cheye felt confident that people who knew him and Trinity would know they'd never have anything to do with drugs. But what about everyone else?
...
"In other words, police can do what they did to us with impunity" Cheye concluded. "There are no consequences, not for them."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...R2009012302935.html?sid=ST2009013002471&s_pos

Aggressive heavily-armed police force that answers to noone. Why do we have a group of Vic Mackey wannabes in an area that's nicknamed "the new Mayberry"?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='DarkSageRK']What objective reporting.[/quote]

The scene at the house was so terrible and odd to Berwyn Heights officer Johnson that he planted himself in the living room. He couldn't see a search warrant posted anywhere. The mayor looked so vulnerable that Johnson wanted to make sure nothing even worse happened to him, such as getting shot. "Not that I didn't trust the police," Johnson would later say. "But I wanted to personally witness what is going to happen to my mayor, so if they try to say this guy went for a gun -- and he didn't -- it's not going to happen on my watch."

That's a direct quote from a police officer. The story doesn't give you any pause for concern?
 
I was more concerned that the journalist was overstepping his/her bounds by stuffing that article so full of their own beliefs that the bias was seeping out of it.

Whether or not I agree with them is besides that point. You'd probably get a better discussion without such an emotionally-charged piece.
 
[quote name='DarkSageRK']You'd probably get a better discussion without such an emotionally-charged piece.[/quote]

Attaching emotions tends to make people cling to their side more, allowing more heated, senseless debate. Now, while to some that may not be a good discussion, but I love people who can't be moved by logic.
 
I'm familiar with the story, the article is only biased in favor of the truth.

This mayor is going to be a very wealthy man. Its a shame that the only recourse they'll have will be financial, these people's actions were criminal and they should be in jail.

I wonder if he could've ordered his police force to remove or arrest the other police who could not produce a warrant. The badge does not place you above the law.
 
did i miss the part where the police planted the drugs? no really, i read it and it was talking about drugs being shipped to the guys house, not for him, but shipped to his house nonetheless. so where was the planting part?
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']did i miss the part where the police planted the drugs? no really, i read it and it was talking about drugs being shipped to the guys house, not for him, but shipped to his house nonetheless. so where was the planting part?[/quote]

You're right, planted isn't the right word and I changed the title. Here's the details:

The first news reports on the raid at the Berwyn Heights mayor's house quoted spokesmen for the Prince George's police saying that the mayor and his family remained "persons of interest" in an ongoing drug-smuggling investigation. Police said they became aware of the box addressed to Trinity when a drug-sniffing dog had alerted them to it at a package hub, and authorities notified the county police. A police spokesman told reporters that Prince George's narcotics investigators had sought, and been granted, a "no-knock" warrant before searching Cheye and Trinity's house. Maryland law authorizes police to request a no-knock warrant, one intended to be served by force and unannounced, if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that evidence would be destroyed or officers' lives placed in danger if they knocked on a suspect's door and demanded entry.
Those same news reports quoted law enforcement officials around the region saying it was a known tactic of traffickers to ship a package containing drugs to an innocent stranger's home, planning to retrieve it before the recipient opened the box. In fact, law enforcement officials told reporters, recent incidents in College Park and Dunn Loring had been foiled when surprised innocents alerted police after opening the packages before the dealers could snatch them. Cheye was flabbergasted. Given that, how could the police who had broken down his front door with a battering ram, terrorized his family and killed his dogs not at least have considered the possibility, even the likelihood, that he might be innocent?
On Friday, Aug. 1 -- 71 hours after the raid -- the lead detective, Scarlata, returned to their home. He came alone. Cheye met him at the fence. The detective handed Cheye the warrant he had first asked to see while handcuffed in his living room. Scarlata also gave Cheye a list of what they'd confiscated in the raid. It consisted of a single item: the box police had brought there in the first place.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']did i miss the part where the police planted the drugs? no really, i read it and it was talking about drugs being shipped to the guys house, not for him, but shipped to his house nonetheless. so where was the planting part?[/QUOTE]
The drugs were shipped to his house by a 3rd party who was shipping drugs to innocent people and taking the packages from the doorstep. The police intercepted the package and used it as the sole evidence to secure the warrant for the sting. They delivered the package and waited for the occupants to pick it up and take it inside. They then entered the house, seized the drugs, and arrested the occupants for possessing them.
 
ok, thats how i read it, that they were delivered by a 3rd party. i thought maybe i missed something. still, thats unbelievably poor investigating.
 
That'd be a heck of a way to get someone you don't like. Send drugs to them and tip off the police about it anonymously.
 
according to the article there was a "no-knock warrant", i assume that means there was a warrant they didnt have to show to the household until afterwords. whether or not that happened is another story.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Before anything else, I want to see if a warrant existed or not.[/QUOTE]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/08/05/ST2008080503214.html
Prince George's County authorities did not have a "no-knock" warrant when they burst into the home of a mayor July 29, shooting and killing his two dogs -- contrary to what police said after the incident.
No-knock or not, you are required by law to serve the warrant at the time of the raid, and this detective swore in the affidavit that he did. They did not serve the warrant until 3 days later.

This is the actual warrant: (note that the only evidence is the package that was intercepted)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-sr...rant020109.pdf?sid=ST2009013002471&s_pos=list


He had a live chat yesterday and took questions, here's the transcript:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2009/01/29/DI2009012902433.html

And here is his facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=72214476368
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks, dafoomie. Seems like it's a pretty flagrant violation of procedural law, then. Which means, of course, the violators will get paid leave for a period. That'll teach 'em.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Isn't this an old story? I remember this from last summer. Why is being bumped in the news now ?[/QUOTE]
The Washington Post ran a feature on it as the cover story for their Sunday magazine this week. There was never such a detailed account.

I assume he's getting his story out there in advance of a major civil rights lawsuit.
 
bread's done
Back
Top