Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve harris who wrote (189611)	6/17/2006 2:52:35 PM
From: geode00	Respond to of 281500

Why don't you pay attention to what your rightwing government is doing? Why? When will you GET IT? "...The 5-4 decision in a Detroit drug case undercuts a nearly century-old rule that says evidence found during an unlawful search cannot be used. The decision also offers a sign that the court might be more apt to strengthen the hand of police with Justice Samuel Alito in the place of retired justice Sandra Day O'Connor. O'Connor, who was on the court when the case was first argued, had worried about "the sanctity of the home." Alito sided fully with Justice Antonin Scalia's majority opinion, which emphasized that tossing out evidence acquired in violation of the knock-and-announce rule — but with a valid warrant — could mean "releasing dangerous criminals." In a dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer called the decision "doubly troubling." "It represents a significant departure from the court's precedents," he wrote, joined by John Paul Stevens, David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. "It weakens, perhaps destroys, much of the practical value of the Constitution's knock-and-announce protection." The rule is based on a centuries-old idea of home privacy and the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches. It requires police to knock, announce themselves and wait a "reasonable" time, which justices noted can be about 20 seconds, before entering. The practice shields occupants from surprise and property damage... Kennedy noted that he didn't agree with a section of Scalia's decision that would have more broadly weakened the rule requiring evidence from an improper search to be kept out, depriving Scalia of the necessary fifth vote to further curtail the Fourth Amendment...." usatoday.com This could also have the unintended effect of having police shot or hurt by freaked out home owners because, you know, the police never make mistakes and go to the wrong home.