GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-30-2011, 10:17   #1
frank_drebin
1-man flash mob
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,819
warrant-less “protective sweep” gets expensive for the Lumpkin Co SO

Interesting story out of the local paper. The summary of the story is that Geoffrey Asher sped passed a deputy. That deputy followed him or pursued him to Mr Asher's residence where he then confronted the Plaintiff.

It got ugly after that...

Guns drawn, backup called, warrant-less search of property, etc...

A Federal Jury found that Mr Asher's 4th Amendment rights had been violated by the SO.

Six years of legal fees, punitive damages, compensatory damages going to Mr Asher now.

http://www.thedahloneganugget.com/ar...20lawsuits.txt

Last edited by frank_drebin; 08-30-2011 at 10:20..
frank_drebin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 10:26   #2
BamaTrooper
Almost Done
 
BamaTrooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: football heaven
Posts: 11,670
Send a message via Yahoo to BamaTrooper
I wonder how long the deputy was behind him and he didn't realize it?
Rather broad on the protective sweep though.
__________________
"Some people learn by words, some people learn by consequences, some people can't learn." CNS
BamaTrooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 10:30   #3
frank_drebin
1-man flash mob
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by BamaTrooper View Post
I wonder how long the deputy was behind him and he didn't realize it?
Rather broad on the protective sweep though.
Yeah, if you've got kids, like I do, then you know Mr Asher was probably quite aware of what was happening as he pulled in to his driveway.

Last edited by frank_drebin; 08-30-2011 at 10:31..
frank_drebin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 10:33   #4
John Rambo
Raven
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tampa, Fl.
Posts: 8,006
Good for the homeowner! These kinds of rulings always make my day.
John Rambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 10:33   #5
BamaTrooper
Almost Done
 
BamaTrooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: football heaven
Posts: 11,670
Send a message via Yahoo to BamaTrooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by frank_drebin View Post
Yeah, if you've got kids, like I do, then you know Mr Asher was probably quite aware of what was happening as he pulled in to his driveway.
I'm sure.
Still, the house sweep? I don't know how the reached that far on what info the article relayed.
__________________
"Some people learn by words, some people learn by consequences, some people can't learn." CNS
BamaTrooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 10:52   #6
Carrys
Inquisitive
 
Carrys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Green Country
Posts: 13,232
As a retired police officer, I'm never sorry to see rulings that go against any person or department that violates someone's rights. And it appears that is what happened here, at least as far as the court was concerned.

Proper training, the duty to hire people other than one's son in law or any other relatives, and ensuring that only properly trained and competent people are behind the badge is the responsibility of any department that cares about quality service to its community. The days of giving "Bubba" a gun and badge and telling them to get after it...... are long gone. It's their job to supply their communities with quality trained and properly educated officers. Rulings such as this are hard on a community, but at least it shows them that they alone are responsible for the people they place in charge of their own law enforcement. Can't be electing/hiring Joe Blow the rag man and expect to get top notch people to police them. First rate people hire first rate officers, even if they are better than their selves. Second rate people will always hire second rate subordinates.




As to the few folks who apparently hate anyone being able to "tell them what to do" and evidently dislike any type of "authority", it's what the society and community you live in have chosen and it's what those people have paid the good and decent officers to do.......so live with it or find yourself a rock to live under, eh?





Just my opinion.
__________________
If Men Won't Even Obey Their Govt.......What Makes Anyone Believe They Will Obey Their God?

Men Seem To Think Their God Is Like Their Govt.......He Is Supposed To Give Them Things, Not Ask Anything Of them.
Carrys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 10:55   #7
Agent6-3/8
Senior Member
 
Agent6-3/8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The ramparts of civilization
Posts: 11,470
Hmm...the article leaves me confused.

How long was Deputy Cole in pursuit of Asher? Were his lights and sirens activated? Did the deputy call in a pursuit? My biggest question; what did the "protective sweep" entail?

According to the article is sounds like Asher ignored the deputy's attempt to initiate a traffic stop. Once home, Asher further ignored the deputy's commands and entered his home. IMO, the deputy would have been right in pursing the man into this home, detaining him and securing the scene. Apparently, the protective sweep went beyond "plain view doctrine" and into the relm of a search.

I'll admit I'm stretching here trying to find a reasonable explaination why things turned out the way they did. There jsut isn't enough info...
__________________
"The mountains are calling and I must go." -John Muir

Last edited by Agent6-3/8; 08-30-2011 at 10:55..
Agent6-3/8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 11:05   #8
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,818
Blog Entries: 1
What exactly is a "protective sweep"?

-Dana
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 11:15   #9
ray9898
Senior Member
 
ray9898's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Georgia
Posts: 17,138


Really not enough details in that article to understand what happened. The Deputies would have been completely in their right to enter the home without a warrant due to hot pursit, they would also have been justified in a protective sweep to ensure no other persons were inside that could pose a threat.

I can only assume they went to far in and made it a search instead of simply clearing places a person could be. However, the article does not make that clear.

Last edited by ray9898; 08-30-2011 at 11:21..
ray9898 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 11:17   #10
John Rambo
Raven
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tampa, Fl.
Posts: 8,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
What exactly is a "protective sweep"?

-Dana
A made up term to describe what happens when a cop decides hes above the law and storms and ransacks your house without legal justification.
John Rambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 11:22   #11
Agent6-3/8
Senior Member
 
Agent6-3/8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The ramparts of civilization
Posts: 11,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
What exactly is a "protective sweep"?

-Dana
Basically a protective sweep is to ensure there is no one is a danger to the officers and others on scene. As an example, if you find some one murdered in their living room, you'll want to do a protetive sweep of the house to ensure that the suspect isn't still here hiding.

In the we're discussing, I would think the sweep was done to ensure there wasn't someone else in the house loading preparing to attack he deputies on scene. During a protective sweep you can look in places a suspect could hide, but you can't go into drawers, medicine cabinets, etc. Contraband found in plain view (like a kilo of cocaine on the coffee table for example) could be seized, but you can't go digging. I suspect this is where the problem is.
__________________
"The mountains are calling and I must go." -John Muir
Agent6-3/8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 11:22   #12
BIGGUNS911
Senior Member
 
BIGGUNS911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: in the NW
Posts: 291
From an story I found quotes from the "Free Republic"

The eight-person jury listened intently as a pair of Asher's neighbor's took to the stand and described what they saw take place on the front-lawn that day.

“I actually sat down in the rocking chair and watched the event,” said Kyle Carroll. “It was quite the neighborhood spectacle.”

Carroll said that he walked onto his back-porch to see Asher sitting on his truck while a deputy pointed a gun in the defendant's direction.

“He had his weapon trained on Mr. Asher,” said Carroll. “Mr. Asher was sitting on his tailgate with his arms crossed.”

Much of this face-off was shown for the jury through the footage from Cole's patrol car dash-cam.

In this video, the vehicle of fellow neighbor and witness Jennifer Green can be spotted as Cole's patrol car raced by her in pursuit of Asher.

“[He] was driving erratically,” she said while on the stand. “Really, really fast. And it caused me actually have to swerve to get out of its way.”

Green added that it did not appear to her that Asher was actually being pursued by the patrol car, since Cole had not turned on a siren.

“I couldn't tell that it was following Mr. Asher's truck,” she said. “It was just far enough apart .. I didn't make the connection.”

Asher himself took to the stand and told the court that he, too, was unaware that Cole was in pursuit of his vehicle that day. He said he was shocked and angered to find a deputy on his front lawn with his gun drawn.

“At that moment I was a bit confused. I did not know what was going to happen. I asked ‘Why are you here?'” he said. “And he screamed he was going to shoot me.'”

As evidenced from the dash-cam, Asher yelled back.

“I got a little annoyed when he wouldn't hostler his gun,” he said, while on the stand.

Asher admitted that he refused to follow the deputy's orders for him to lay down on the ground. Instead he said he was waiting for a commanding officer to take control of the scene.

“My sincere belief and hope was that adult supervision was going to show up,” he said.
BIGGUNS911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 11:38   #13
frank_drebin
1-man flash mob
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,819
BIGGUNS911.... Please delete the above quote to keep this thread from getting locked.

Last edited by frank_drebin; 08-30-2011 at 12:09..
frank_drebin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 11:40   #14
Smashy
Senior Member
 
Smashy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Southwestern Oregon
Posts: 14,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
What exactly is a "protective sweep"?

-Dana



Civil Liberties Issues
Smashy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 11:53   #15
BamaTrooper
Almost Done
 
BamaTrooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: football heaven
Posts: 11,670
Send a message via Yahoo to BamaTrooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Rambo View Post
A made up term to describe what happens when a cop decides hes above the law and storms and ransacks your house without legal justification.
The above comes from the Conspiracy Theorist's Dictionary available from TinFoil Press 1984
__________________
"Some people learn by words, some people learn by consequences, some people can't learn." CNS
BamaTrooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 11:58   #16
Carrys
Inquisitive
 
Carrys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Green Country
Posts: 13,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Rambo View Post
A made up term to describe what happens when a cop decides hes above the law and storms and ransacks your house without legal justification.


"Storms" and "ransacks", eh?

Were those the words the court or article used, or are those simply to show us all your dislike of what happened? You seem to have knowledge that no on else has concerning the Deputy's actions, action that were indeed wrong. Seems that isn't enough for you though.

It's like I were listening to a PO'ed liberal trying to justify their position when they couldn't find anything else that pleased them enough truth wise.



Let me guess, ya got a bumper sticker that says "From my cold dead hands!" and you wear cammo and a boonie hat everywhere ya go?
__________________
If Men Won't Even Obey Their Govt.......What Makes Anyone Believe They Will Obey Their God?

Men Seem To Think Their God Is Like Their Govt.......He Is Supposed To Give Them Things, Not Ask Anything Of them.
Carrys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 12:04   #17
Carrys
Inquisitive
 
Carrys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Green Country
Posts: 13,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIGGUNS911 View Post
“My sincere belief and hope was that adult supervision was going to show up,” he said.
Sounds to me as if a supervisor had shown up, he would have been the only "adult" there.




Cause as we all know, when the person being charged with a crime or chased is speaking........he's the only one speaking the truth, no?
__________________
If Men Won't Even Obey Their Govt.......What Makes Anyone Believe They Will Obey Their God?

Men Seem To Think Their God Is Like Their Govt.......He Is Supposed To Give Them Things, Not Ask Anything Of them.
Carrys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 05:21   #18
Bren
NRA Life Member
 
Bren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 33,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by frank_drebin View Post
Interesting story out of the local paper. The summary of the story is that Geoffrey Asher sped passed a deputy. That deputy followed him or pursued him to Mr Asher's residence where he then confronted the Plaintiff.

It got ugly after that...

Guns drawn, backup called, warrant-less search of property, etc...

A Federal Jury found that Mr Asher's 4th Amendment rights had been violated by the SO.

Six years of legal fees, punitive damages, compensatory damages going to Mr Asher now.

http://www.thedahloneganugget.com/ar...20lawsuits.txt

Not much of an article - if they were arresting the guy, a protective sweep was legal, but it may have gone farther than the law allows. Here, that case would have been an arrest and a protective sweep of the immeidate area around him would be perfectly legal under federal/constitutional law.

Coincidentally, I have made exactly the same arrest...of my police chief's 2 nephews...who refused to stop and tried to go in their house after I tried t stop one of them for speeding. I also got sued in federal court, but they both lost blood and had hospital visits and I won the lawsuit. I got sued for beating them, not for the search.
__________________
Open carry activists are to gun rights what the Westboro Baptist Church is to free speech.

Last edited by Bren; 09-02-2011 at 05:21..
Bren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 07:00   #19
Brucev
Senior Member
 
Brucev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,189
Happily the jury got it right. The Constitution trumps entitlements... even those of LEO’s who want to conduct warrantless searches under the color of training. The former sheriff and deputy are held accountable. A money judgment comprised of compensatory and punitive damages is awarded to the plaintiff. The county is liable for plaintiff’s attorney fees, etc. Justice is served.

Further worthy of note... that Asher had five guns in his vehicle along with other guns in the house as well as ammunition, medical suppies, etc. Is irrelevant. He probably also had a sack of potatoes in the kitchen and some toilet tissue in the bathroom. The efforts of deputies to charge him with drug and weapon offense were as substantial as the tissue that would have been found in that bathroom.

The noted defiance of Asher as cause to search was not sustained. Odd. Citizens are not required to abandon their Constitutionally guaranteed civil rights in the face of a out-of-control officer threatening to shoot them. Good for jury. They understand the Constitution.

Miller was not judged credible by the jury. Apparently they did not have confidence in his veracity or that of Stover. Miller’s militia or supremist fishing expedition apparently failed on its face to convince anyone likely due to his or anyone else’s failure to provide any substantiation by any follow-up investigation. Amazingly Miller was unsure of what the follow-up investigation entailed. Odd.

In the end, it all came down to credibility. After only two hours of deliberation, the jury found that Asher concluded that Asher was telling the truth and that Miller and the other officers were lying. The jury followed the Constitution. Excellent.

This is the second time that the search by Miller and company has been found unconstitutional. Happily Judge Miller (LCSC) knows how to read and apply the Constitution. Excellent.

Now... it's time for individual personal lawsuist to be brought against Miller and others associated with the above abuse of Ashers' Constitutional rights. The matter cannot be considered settled in full until they have been individually personally forced to accept responsibility for their violation of the law. Otherwise, they are free to once again go out and offend.
Brucev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 15:37   #20
Booker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post
Not much of an article - if they were arresting the guy, a protective sweep was legal, but it may have gone farther than the law allows. Here, that case would have been an arrest and a protective sweep of the immeidate area around him would be perfectly legal under federal/constitutional law.

Coincidentally, I have made exactly the same arrest...of my police chief's 2 nephews...who refused to stop and tried to go in their house after I tried t stop one of them for speeding. I also got sued in federal court, but they both lost blood and had hospital visits and I won the lawsuit. I got sued for beating them, not for the search.
Did I read this correctly? Are you stating that you got sued for beating two people bad enough to put them in hospital for speeding?
Booker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 15:46   #21
BamaTrooper
Almost Done
 
BamaTrooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: football heaven
Posts: 11,670
Send a message via Yahoo to BamaTrooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booker View Post
Did I read this correctly? Are you stating that you got sued for beating two people bad enough to put them in hospital for speeding?
Sounds like he tried to do a speeding stop, it escalated into a failure to yield and a resisting arrest.
__________________
"Some people learn by words, some people learn by consequences, some people can't learn." CNS
BamaTrooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 11:37   #22
poikilotrm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by BamaTrooper View Post
I wonder how long the deputy was behind him and he didn't realize it?
Rather broad on the protective sweep though.

Woo hoo! 20 posts! Now I can answer this stuff.

The dash cam video plainly shows that Deputy Sterling Cole was never behind me and never used his lights, siren, or PA system. The video is now included in Georgia POST curriculum as an example of how NOT to do a traffic stop.

The protective sweep was a canard that was repeatedly shown to be false in several court rooms.
poikilotrm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 11:38   #23
poikilotrm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by frank_drebin View Post
Yeah, if you've got kids, like I do, then you know Mr Asher was probably quite aware of what was happening as he pulled in to his driveway.
And you would be wrong. The video contradicts your supposition.
poikilotrm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 11:39   #24
poikilotrm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by BamaTrooper View Post
I'm sure.
Still, the house sweep? I don't know how the reached that far on what info the article relayed.
It was a punitive act. My real crime was contempt of cop, so they decided to vadalize and rob my home, which they did. They stole about $7000 worth of stuff and trashed the place.
poikilotrm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 11:43   #25
poikilotrm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carrys View Post
. The days of giving "Bubba" a gun and badge and telling them to get after it...... are long gone.
Not in rural Georgia. Not by a long shot.

Quote:
It's their job to supply their communities with quality trained and properly
educated officers. Rulings such as this are hard on a community, but at least it
shows them that they alone are responsible for the people they place in charge
of their own law enforcement.
Bull ****. The Sheriff hires his deputies, not the community.

Quote:
As to the few folks who apparently hate anyone being able to "tell them what to do" and evidently dislike any type of "authority", it's what the society and community you live in have chosen and it's what those people have paid the good and decent officers to do.......so live with it or find yourself a rock to live under, eh?
What about those of us who don't like mongoloid infused armed goon squads wandering around preying on people and getting away with rape, murder, and kidnapping? What would be your feasable and workable suggestion for us?
poikilotrm is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:16.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 733
183 Members
550 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42