# Searching homes, without warrent & not officially Martial Law



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Okay - 
Since Boston and Watertown are essentially under Martial Law, but it's not called that...
And the troops/LE are searching for this bomber fellow...

IF they come to your door, and want to search.... 

What is your reaction? and is it something you could say "no" to since it is not martial law, which might give the search request a more "officially recognized" acceptable reason for doing this search?

I just thought of this as I was looking for "Martial Law" and Boston, as I'd heard that they were now under official "Martial Law" and not just asked to stay inside.

Are you ready for this delima? Might be worth thinking seriously on.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

at least if the state is under a state of emergency or martial law they CAN NOT take our guns , that was passed here after Katrina 

were i live , i would probably be inviting the local officers for coffee if they were hanging out on my street.

no i don't like the legal implications of the hole mess , but if they are actively chasing suspects I would assure them i had not let any one in.

I would expect that any evidence unrelated to the terror case would be tainted for not having a warrant. meaning the cops in Boston could end up finding a crack house they didn't know about and then be able to know were it was to try and catch those offenders later but that nothing they saw while chasing a terror suspect would be admissible in another case , this is especialy complicated in light of the new ruling that bringing a police dog to the porch of a house to smell for drugs is in violation of that persons privacy.


----------



## Cyngbaeld (May 20, 2004)

Only thing you can do is get out of their way at that point. They have the greater fire power and what are you going to do? Likely to die if you try to stop them. I don't think they can look for anything except the fugitive though.


----------



## MountainCat (Aug 15, 2011)

This user on Twitter states that LEO asked her if she wanted them to search her home. She said no, they said ok, and they left. She's started a bit of a heated discussion; you can check out her Twitter to get an insider's view of the lockdown...










To answer the original question, if I was sure my house was safe I would deny them entrance. I don't need anyone else in my home adding to my anxiety levels if they don't need to be there. Unless they have a warrant or probable cause, they don't need to come inside.


----------



## Raymond James (Apr 15, 2013)

If the police are chasing someone they can and will follow them onto your property and into your home / buildings no warrant needed for a pursuit. If this situation should occur you should not attempt to stop the officers . If they are firing at the suspect and the suspect is shooting back or throwing bombs you need to get out of the way. 

Attempt to stop the officers with a weapon in your hands and you will most likely be fired on or at least detained.


----------



## nostawmama (Dec 29, 2011)

I would say no if they asked to come in my home- I know the suspect is not in my home. If this happened when my hubs was not home and there is the possiblility that the suspect might be hidden in the outbuildings then I would invite them to search there. I don't have anything to hide and I respect the job that the officers need to do. This is there job so I would do my best to not hinder them nor waste their time.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

Under the described circumstances I would be totally cooperative with authorities and want to be noted as being a cooperative person. I'd ask if there's anything I could do to assist them. I know they'd say no but I see no harm in letting searchers know that I'm willing to help. I have nothing to hide or be ashamed of in my home so they'd be welcome to come inside and search my home and search outside on my property. I'm just curious enough about how they operate I would want to watch their activities with interest and I would probably ask them too many questions. LOL.

Somebody mentioned they'd offer the law men coffee - the paranoid part of me dictates that's one thing I would not do. I wouldn't offer beverages or food when they're on duty during a search. I wouldn't want to put myself in a position where someone might get sick from something they ingested that they got from me and then say I tried to poison them.


----------



## Mike in Ohio (Oct 29, 2002)

I would decline to have them search my home.

Mike


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

I didn't say anything about running, about bombs, about guns.

Just if under the don't leave your home conditions, would you let them search your home? Just in a normal walking up to your door, and asking to search your home.

ETA: I started this post and was distracted, before I saw the last few answers.


----------



## unregistered41671 (Dec 29, 2009)

NO!! What would Angie do?


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

I don't think I would agree to it. I would not make an issue, unless pushed about it.

If pushed, I would hope to have the pushee's name and if applicable badge number for future reference. Not even saying I'd do anything with it, but I would like to know should I need it. Then, I'd want to use my tablet, or such recording device to record their search - so nothing could appear should someone decide something should appear.

I would wonder under what authority they think they are entitled to do a search of my home or car, unless it was declared officially Martial Law, which is is different than the current conditions up there (just stay inside).

If they would not allow that recording of them going through a pile of fabric and yarn and can goods, then I really would want to know more about them. 

This is easy to say behind a keyboard, but I'll have to search myself to make sure I could follow through and it's given me a whole bunch of 'rights' issues and laws to research to see what legs I have to stand on.

It's rather like being stopped by a police for a broken tail light and them wanting to search your vehicle.


----------



## hsmom2four (Oct 13, 2008)

In a situation like this I would want to cooperate fully. I don't have anything to hide except a sometimes messy house. However, what I've seen on TV where people are standing outside their homes and letting LE go inside alone would not be acceptable. They would have to stay within my site at all times while they looked around. 

Now if it was just local LE looking for a common fugitive they wouldn't get in unless I knew for sure the bad guy was there. We did grant LE permission to come in our yard once when a perp they were chasing jumped our fence. My dog went crazy and had the guy cornered which is how the cops knew where to find him.


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

I would honestly be afraid they would hurt my little yappy ankle biters. I have chihuahuas running hither and tither, so I would have to corral them first just for their own safety. 
I wouldn't have a problem with LEO looking around just to make sure some dangerous person hadn't come into my home without my knowledge, but I would fear for the ankle biting rats. They might hurt one if it attacked their pants leg or something.


----------



## Ohio dreamer (Apr 6, 2006)

I think my response would dependent on too much to give a blanket answer to the question. 

IF I had been home during all this, and knew no one they were interested in was in my house. I'd deny a request to search. Now, that said I may hand them my keys and let them check my locked garage and unlocked shed that is not attached to my house as I may not be100% sure someone isn't in there.

If I came home to this "mess"....I'd be requesting them to check my house and outbuildings!

If we were under some sort of Martial Law that suspended the Bill of Rights......I'd not stand in their way, but request that the outside of my house be secured first and only 1-2 come in and check....with me right behind them, unarmed. I'm a bit touchy having people I know in my house (including my parents) but can usually handle it when per-arranged.....I'd have big issues having people I don't know, especially with heightened adrenaline and "fitted for war", crawling through my house.....but I'd try to work with them in a reasonable manner.


----------



## Jenstc2003 (Apr 4, 2012)

Tough call. I'd probably allow it- I have nothing to hide, and a dog to protect- but I would be with them at all times, and I would ask them to give me a second to allow me to corral the pup first to prevent any miscommunication, as he not used to being around people he doesn't know and they might think he was being nasty when he was just being excited.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

If they want to come into my home they need a warrant. I will use force against any persons who try to force their way into my home without due process.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Cyngbaeld said:


> Only thing you can do is get out of their way at that point. They have the greater fire power and what are you going to do? Likely to die if you try to stop them. I don't think they can look for anything except the fugitive though.


IIRC, if they come in and anything illegal is 'in plain sight' they can arrest you for it.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Funny how things have changed. Years ago we had an escaped convict shoot a cop (got him in the buttocks) and got a way. This happened a few miles from where we lived. Not long after we had to go away for a few days. When I got back they still had not found him so I asked a buddy of mine to follow me home so we could check the house before we went in.

We got there he parked in front and I pulled up to the side. Before we got out a state patrol car stopped and a trooper and a NG troop got out and asked me what was going on. I told them and he said no prob. UNTIL my buddy and I pulled out handguns. Then he got all uppity. Which sort of set me off. I asked him if THEY wanted to clear the house, after all they were _trained_ and had body armor. He told me they were not allowed to do so. I then asked him if he'd like to walk through the house UNarmed to check things out. He hummed and hawwed. Finally I told him he needed to either arrest me or get out of my way. He moved back and after we had cleared the house I thanked him for all the help.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

It would certainly depend on the circumstance. I would generally tend to allow it, if it would help them in doing the job they are attempting to do in MA tonight. My answer would be, "Absolutely. Come on in".


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

Somehow, I don' think anyone from Boston is in my house... 

I agree, things would vary depending on the situation. It would take man-YEARS to search every home and building in the Boston area. As it is, the bill for this is going higher than that of a doctor intent on a round the world cruise - by a factor of at least 1000. Such searches are an unwarranted brute-force approach that show lack of intelligence.

I'm sure a judge would quickly give search warrants for places previously known to have been visited by the suspect. If I owned such a property, I'd WANT a search. If OTOH, I lived on the other side of Boston, and people came a rapping, gently tapping, at my bedroom door, I would insist on the formality of having them get a warrant. The use of a judge in such situations is one of the checks and balances.

The closing down of Amtrak is just incomprehensibly stupid. It is hard enough and expensive enough to get train tickets, that such a move wouldn't occur.

Why not just offer the guy a ticket to Chicago, where he will blend in nicely?


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

It greatly depends on the circumstances.

Under the same circumstances as going on in Boston, I'd probably be cooperative......my logic being that the perp is obviously not afraid to kill, more innocent people (myself or my neighbors) could get killed before he's apprehended and if searching my home would help LE catch him sooner, I'd gladly help.


----------



## Hobbes (Apr 1, 2008)

This is just a field test for a large population center lockdown.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

I was talking with the the wife and thought of something. How would you like to know there is an armed killer who is possibly ready to blow himself up and all you can do is hide in your house and hope he doesn't show up because you have been disarmed by the government.


----------



## InvalidID (Feb 18, 2011)

IF there were a crazy bomber in my house I'd be calling the cops to come clean up his corpse (or my own?). Other than that, no need for LEO in my house.


----------



## manygoatsnmore (Feb 12, 2005)

They got him!


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

If they asked me all I would do is say do you have a warrant and step aside.


----------



## BoldViolet (Feb 5, 2009)

My welcome mat says "Come Back With a Warrant." I would point to that and decline until they returned with one.


----------



## GeorgiaLady (Jul 18, 2012)

Hobbes said:


> This is just a field test for a large population center lockdown.


Why can't I say things like this and not get flamed? :bow:


----------



## GeorgiaLady (Jul 18, 2012)

In response to Angies question, no, I would not allow a search of my home if I was 100% sure the suspect wasn't inside. As far as being locked down inside my home? Not gonna happen either. BOB's would be in the car and I would be headed for the hills by the time LE came knocking at my door.


----------



## bassmaster17327 (Apr 6, 2011)

NO search without a warrant and that is just they way it is. I have never had a cop ask to search my house but I have had one ask to search my car, when I said no I got the typical "do you have something to hide" but that was about it and my car wasn't searched. 

Now if I thought there was a criminal in my house I would be calling the police to come, I always carry a firearm and I am confident that I could protect myself but I would prefer to let the cops use deadly force than doing it myself and having the chance of being Zimmermaned


----------



## Pearl B (Sep 27, 2008)

Absolutely not. I know who's in my home and who isnt. If my word, he/she's not in here, & they dont believe that, we have a problem. They would need a warrant. 
They would be be free to check anything outside. Ive actually had Leo catch a wanted suspect out in the yard/shed, at a house my boyfriend & I were renting in a city years ago.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

No they aren't comeing in here without a warrent, an I'm not being mean. I need to protect myself first and I don't trust the law anymore. I told the cencus people to come back with a warrent and the National Animal ID people can do the same.


----------



## Wolf mom (Mar 8, 2005)

Easy enough to come to the door with your guard dog & state you KNOW the fugitive is not inside your house, but please feel free to check the out buildings. And Yes, they do need to ask your permission first if they do not have a warrant.


----------



## TNHermit (Jul 14, 2005)

Wonder how people would feel about what happened yesterday if they were hunting down a guy selling raw milk.

How much latitude did the people give on their rights because he was dirt bag. He was a dirt bag of dirt bags ,but there is plenty to think about the way things were done. There are also reports of gun confiscations and other illegal tricks


----------



## Raymond James (Apr 15, 2013)

The only people talking about taking all guns is the NRA. If you listen to the current gun debate at the federal level it is about background checks. Currently a criminal or a law abiding person can buy a gun without a background check. Criminals will still sell criminals guns . Background checks would stop law abiding citizens from selling to criminals. Because everyone can tell who is a criminal right? no way to tell . The latest background check proposal still would not have applied to private sales or to individuals to give guns to relatives unless they did so at a gun show. The NRA sys differently that is because the NRA lied about this. 

The background checks are currently done by licensed fire arm dealers. the proposal only allied to private individuals when they were at a gun show. Leave the show grounds sell any gun to anyone. No need to know the guys name or real name or know anything about him. 

No guns that are currently owned are being taken- even if laws to stop manufacture of new Semi automatic rifles AR15/AK47 or magazines greater than 10 rounds were to pass the multiple millions of this type of weapon/magazine would still be legal to own, sell, trade, give. 

Do I need an expensive AR 15 to defend my home from an intruder or is a short barrel pump 12 gauge shot gun a much more effective and far cheaper weapon to use? I bought a 12 gauge pump action for $70 at an action had a gun smith cut it at 18 1/2 inches for $25 Less than a 100 or spend a thousand + for an AR 15 and magazines? 

Again even if the proposed federal laws were to pass I could still have a weapon and still have a AR 15 if I currently owned one to defend my home. 



As to the original question- The stay in your home and lock your doors was a request to the public. I have not heard of any homes being searched when an owner said no. Not heard of any arrest for people who choose to move around.


----------



## Apocalypse Boy (May 4, 2012)

Darntootin said:


> If they want to come into my home they need a warrant. I will use force against any persons who try to force their way into my home without due process.


You will lose.


Hypothetically (since I live in a rural area QUITE a way away from Boston) I would politely tell them that I didn't think it'd be necessary (you can see most of my house from the front door anyway) as I was already sure the house was clear but I'd give them permission to search my storage/outbuildings.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

I do know that when there was a man hunt and were were locked down that the following did happen to everyone I know in my town.

1. Suddenly in a small town like Mayberry there were helecoppters in the sky, LEO cars going slow. The radio and tv were turned on and people hit the phone lines --any thing to find out what was up.

2. Those who went out side early were told what was up and had to talk right away to the LEO. AS in you could not go back inside till you answered questions.

1. Where do you live--is that your home--Do you have id on you now.
2. Who eles is in the home --names 
3. Any one away but expected to return
4. Do you feel safe in your home.
5. Is there anyone in the home threating you or others.
6. Go back stay in side --listen to the radio --stay away from windows Keep the drapes and shades open 
7. Should your safety level change close the shade/drape or hang a cloth from a window facing the street.


Now we were inside. Our local sherif had been killed--causeing this action. A car pull in to our long driveway-- a speaker was loud and asked ---by name-- for my father to come out to the car.---Dad was home --dad was paralized so mom went out. (we did not know of the stay away from windows . She started out they asked over the speakers where my father was --by formal name (not his nick name --they only used his own full formal name that most don't even know) mom shouted and said he was ill.

she was allowed to walk --with guns pointed to here as the cops had gotten out of the car and were crouch by both sides of the car. One LEO came out and mom turn to look back. She never looked back again she seemed tensed.

Then she walked back and pumped her for the news

The same questions that we later learned that those who where outside were ask were asked of her.

She was told that they wanted to speak with the heads of each households away from hearing distantance of the house to make the person safe to answer the truth. They knew that there was a chance that other family members could be held hostage and they would not get a truthfull answer. 

Mom claimed that she offered them to check -- they she said stated that only if needed would they -- they asked her if it was needed. and again asked if there was anyone eles in there other than the family she listed she said no --they asked again if she felt safe with those in the home -- she said yes. 

They told her that something to the effect that time was important and everyones safety was important that since they felt she we truthfull that they needed to move on to the next home.

They lifted the ban at some time later-- the man was not yet found. I was in a show I left with mom -- it was about a60 miles away. there were check points.

we were stopped -- we were told to head to a cop car near by with the keys --they took the keys and informed mom that they needed to check the car trunk--- Honestly I do not remember if they asked --we had guns pointed at us. The truck was checked and we left the check point.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Raymond James said:


> The only people talking about taking all guns is the NRA. If you listen to the current gun debate at the federal level it is about background checks. Currently a criminal or a law abiding person can buy a gun without a background check. Criminals will still sell criminals guns . Background checks would stop law abiding citizens from selling to criminals. Because everyone can tell who is a criminal right? no way to tell . The latest background check proposal still would not have applied to private sales or to individuals to give guns to relatives unless they did so at a gun show. The NRA sys differently that is because the NRA lied about this.
> 
> The background checks are currently done by licensed fire arm dealers. the proposal only allied to private individuals when they were at a gun show. Leave the show grounds sell any gun to anyone. No need to know the guys name or real name or know anything about him.
> 
> ...


What's your plan for stopping a rouge goverment?


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Raymond James said:


> The only people talking about taking all guns is the NRA. If you listen to the current gun debate at the federal level it is about background checks. Currently a criminal or a law abiding person can buy a gun without a background check. Criminals will still sell criminals guns . Background checks would stop law abiding citizens from selling to criminals. Because everyone can tell who is a criminal right? no way to tell . The latest background check proposal still would not have applied to private sales or to individuals to give guns to relatives unless they did so at a gun show. The NRA sys differently that is because the NRA lied about this.
> 
> The background checks are currently done by licensed fire arm dealers. the proposal only allied to private individuals when they were at a gun show. Leave the show grounds sell any gun to anyone. No need to know the guys name or real name or know anything about him.
> 
> ...


this is not about guns, please stop trying to make it so. Really do not appreciate trying to get your agenda in this thread.
And now we know how you stand.

This is about allowing a search with no martial law and no warrent. No running suspect, etc. Thank you for those that have stuck to the topic


----------



## TheMartianChick (May 26, 2009)

I haven't read all of the responses, but I would probably allow law enforcement to search my home and grounds. Not because I thought that the suspect was there, but to prove that he wasn't. I'm not worried about someone thinking that I was assisting the suspect, but I have thought about some of the ways that yesterday's situation could have gone down. 

Imagine that police knock on a door and the homeowner refused them access. It may appear that he/she did it because they don't want the premises searched but what if the suspect was already inside with a gun held to a child's head? I'd like to think that I'd be able to signal the officers somehow, but imagine that my mind might go blank or I'd be too scared.

From the officer's perspective, with the homeowner refusing to allow the property to be searched, that house is now clear and they go on to the next one. It doesn't mean that the area really is clear and other lives might soon be at risk, due to the failure to search the premises.


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

7thswan said:


> What's your plan for stopping a rouge goverment?


I think you mean rogue... although a rouge government could be entertaining...


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

What would the "law" do if they saw guns all over the place? I know the law shot someones dog(tyed up in it's yard) not to far from here, and got away with it. They can look in my outbuildings if I say so and I'll tend my home,and they shouldn't think anything of it-other than I'm a honest citizen and respect my rights.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

In checking the date of the Dil's search and shut down it was 1977 in Nov. Also the shut down ended once every home in the area of the road block was checked then we just had to deal with the road blocks. 

Just a matter of a few hours. I forgot but mom got a business card with a number to call should she see anyone fitting the description in the area.

I think how it was handled in 77 was good as we had freedom to move very quickly

Dils was shot mid day and by 4 pm we were on the road.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> The latest background check proposal still *would not have applied to private sales*





> the proposal only allied to private individuals when they were at a gun show.


*Private sales* are the ONLY sales it WOULD apply to, since all others are* already* covered
It was NOT only limited to "gun shows"
Why parrot the misinformation?



> *Do I need* an expensive AR 15 to defend my home from an intruder or is a short barrel pump 12 gauge shot gun a much more effective and far cheaper weapon to use?


What anyone "needs" is NOT up to the Govt to decide.
If *YOU* choose to limit yourself to a* slower, shorter ranged weapon*, it's *YOUR* choice.


----------



## Wags (Jun 2, 2002)

They would be allowed to search the outbuildings only, There would be no need coming in the house, as the dogs would have alerted us to any "visitors" long before they made it up the ridge to our place. 

When we first moved here there were murder suspects on the run - got caught just a couple of roads over. Our contact with the deputy was brief - he asked if our dogs were always on the property and when we said yes, he said "good" you won't have any trouble with them protecting the place.


----------



## Jakk (Aug 14, 2008)

I would allow them to search outside in my shed and chicken coop, but not in my home. I too have dogs that would alert me to someone trying to gain access to my home, which is a ranch and not that big. No warrant, no access.


----------



## Conhntr (Aug 7, 2010)

Everyone parroting "i have nothing to hide" please, please watch this video. It is kind of long but definently worth it!

And all the "black helicopter" crowd will enjoy it as well althogh it will be preaching to the choir


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Where's the video?


----------



## Conhntr (Aug 7, 2010)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc[/ame]


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

If the video stops and will not play - if you go to the youtube icon and play it there, it will work.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

I've seen the video before, and recommend it often. It doesn't change my answer though.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

My DH is a cop, and he has made it clear that if any LEO comes to the door, they are not to be allowed in without a warrant. We also have dogs, and in this situation I'd do as others here have said they would: Answer the door with my 90-pound Rottweiler at my side, inform the LEO's that the suspect is not in my home, and invite them to check the yard/outbuildings.

I also have a lot of family in the Boston area, and several of my cousins have friends that were in the search zone earlier this week. All of them said that the LEO's *ASKED *if they could search their homes, and when they were told no they were very polite, told them to call 911 if anything changed, and they *LEFT*. 

So from what I'm being told, the LEO's were not forcing themselves into people's homes to search - they were asking if they could, and if they were turned down they didn't insist upon it :shrug:.


----------



## Raymond James (Apr 15, 2013)

Voting booth. Our government is government of the people .


----------



## Raymond James (Apr 15, 2013)

7thswan said:


> What's your plan for stopping a rouge goverment?


Voting booth. Our government is a government of the people.


----------



## Raymond James (Apr 15, 2013)

Bearfootfarm said:


> *Private sales* are the ONLY sales it WOULD apply to, since all others are* already* covered
> It was NOT only limited to "gun shows"
> Why parrot the misinformation?
> 
> ...


Why are you limited to a vehicle that can only go 120 mph? Why accept a speed limit on your road. Is it not your right to do as you please why is the government telling you what to do? 

The citizens of my community imposed speed limits for the public good/safety. The citizens (government) can do this. I so not understand your fear of your fellow citizens .


----------



## Raymond James (Apr 15, 2013)

As to the original post- appears that police did not force anyone to have the house searched . They followed the rules for search warrants and can be expected to do so when the next incident occurs. 

I am concerned with the amount of anti government or lack of trust of government I see in many of these post. Get to know your local government employees they work for you. Go to meetings and express your opinions on topics, register and vote, run for office yourself.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

They may work for me but often times I can and want to do the job myself---once I am required to have someone work for me then I am working for them.


It is the original American way to be self relient and to help our fellow man in their time of need. Thus since we are/were governed from the people===and we ARE the government then how is it anti government to be active in the governering process and speak out on issues the impact us-- Comments that claim that espressing one thoughts or beiliefs are anti govenment are often expressed to control and quiet those persons speaking. It does work on many but not everyone. Now I would like to welcome a fairly new member to this site--tell us about yourself--often times new members introduce themselfs it would be nice to learn a bit more about you.


----------



## triple divide (Jan 7, 2010)

Raymond James said:


> I am concerned with the amount of anti government or lack of trust of government I see in many of these post.


Distrust of government is a healthy thing. The more distrust there is in an overall population, the more likely that population is politicaly educated. 

Certainly not a cause for concern.


----------



## wannabechef (Nov 20, 2012)

Many years ago I consented to a vehicle search...I was young and dumb. Now I will not allow a search of any property without a warrant.


----------



## wannabechef (Nov 20, 2012)

Raymond James said:


> Voting booth. Our government is a government of the people.


Let me know how that works out for you...


----------



## oregon woodsmok (Dec 19, 2010)

You could deny, but with that particular search, I would bet they had a whole bench full of judges issuing any warrant asked for. Electronically transmitted and the police would have their warrant in hand in about 2 minutes.

For that search, I would not try to stand in their way. Under other circumstances, maybe request a warrant, not for this one.


----------



## Conhntr (Aug 7, 2010)

Refusing to consent to a search is not probable cause to initiate a search. If the police can get a bench warrant in 2 minutes good for them, good for them they can go and get it. That way at your trial they wont say "i was invited into the home by the defendent" you lawyer will be questioning whether the warrant was proper instead.


----------



## Billie in MO (Jun 9, 2002)

Angie, my answer would be no. I have mentioned before that Bill is retired LEO. When we still lived in CO we had an incident where the cops started knocking on our door at 1 or 2am. We had a german shepherd then and she went nuts at the door. Bill opened the door and the cop backed up when he saw her trying to come thru the door. Bill did not open the door but talked to him thru the screen door. They had gotten a report that we (Bill and I) had kidnapped Bill's niece. (it was a dirt bag ex-boyfriend of the niece who made the accusation). Bill was polite and answered his questions (don't remember if Bill told him he was retired LEO or not). Bill explained the situation with the ex-boyfriend, that no she was not in our house, and that, yes, we knew where she was and that she was safe. He didn't ask to search the house to make sure she wasn't there but if he had, Bill would have told him, get a warrant.


----------

