Drug Dealer Testifies in Tesler Trial

[Atticus Finch]

To make sure that failure to abode a 17-5-24 restriction was never, ever, ever considered as a mere technical irregularity.

A restriction under the power implicit in the judicial officer's more general power to write the warrant might or might not be considered as a technicality. It would certainly not be considered as a mere technicality if supported by 17-5-26, which is one of te reasons 17-5-26 is in there.

[The Sage]

Law makers don't write laws twice just to make sure they're followed.

Give up, dude. You don't know what you're talking about. When you actually step foot in a court room, then we can talk.

[Atticus Finch]

Oh, you are lucky that I have no plans to practice in Georgia. You would end up getting to know a lot more about 17-5-24 than you ever wanted to know, like what the remedy is for violations of said rule. You should be thanking your luky stars that the good ol' boy network is going to stay intact for the time being.

[Maria Antonia]

Atticus Finch wrote:

Oh, you are lucky that I have no plans to practice in Georgia. You would end up getting to know a lot more about 17-5-24 than you ever wanted to know, like what the remedy is for violations of said rule. You should be thanking your luky stars that the good ol' boy network is going to stay intact for the time being.

I'm probably just tired from a long day, but LOL.
YOU really are the cute one.:)

[The Sage]

You are obviously just a first year law student who doesn't know much of anything.

You think you're going to school me on a 17-5-24 violation? Let me clue you in on something: no one ever, EVER violated 17-5-24 because judges never, EVER say, "Ok, I'll sign this warrant, but only Officer Brown can serve it." It is an authority judges have, but never, EVER use. Why would they? It makes no sense. Why would they care who executes the search warrant? Let's say Officer Brown wanted the SWAT Team to execute the search warrant for safety reasons. But Judge Dummy says, "Only Officer BROWN can execute it." What would be the REMEDY for Officer Brown's family when Officer Brown is shot walking to the house because the SWAT wasn't used like Officer Brown wanted? That's why judges don't ever make use of that stupid code section. So get off your high and mighty horse on what you'll show me. You can't show me anything because you haven't seen ANYTHING yourself except what you've read in your first year law book.

[The Sage]

Oh, and another thing: Metro Atlanta isn't under the rule of the "Good ol' boy system." Thanks for stereotyping this state though. I'm not from here, so I couldn't care less. But since you brought it up, metro Atlanta actually suffers from the "Good ol' brother system." It's like the Good ol' boy system, just a little darker.

[Atticus Finch]

The Sage wrote:

... You think you're going to school me on a 17-5-24 violation?

whoops, made same mistake again. Meant to say 17-5-26. That is what we would be discussing in court, but we won't because I am not coming to Georgia. Which is very good news for you because you can continue to ignore 17-5-26 like the popos have taught you to.

[The Sage]

17-5-26? The search warrant may be executed at any reasonable time? Are you freakin kidding me? I promise you, no one ever, EVER violates that one. It's so vague it would almost be impossible to. And on top of that, criminals, especially drug dealers, keep such crazy hours, one could easily SUCCESSFULLY argue that 11pm is a reasonable time to execute a search warrant.

Seriously, dude. You're just annoying. I've been doing this for years. You've read about it in a book. I'd rather learn Karate from Mr. Miyagi than the book that Daniel LaRusso was using at the beginning of the movie. I've gone head to head with some of the biggest names in criminal defense. I don't lose. Never have. I've never had a search warrant tossed or suppressed. And I can tell you have NO experience with search warrants, because you're griping and pointing out stuff that no decent lawyer would. It's pointless. You're brining up trivial nonsense. When REAL lawyers try to challenge a search warrant, they do it much differently, and MUCH BETTER than you. I've seen other people's warrant's suppressed: not because of some lame "that wasn't a reasonable time to execute the warrant" argument. Seriously, dude, is that the best you got? Cops don't execute warrants at what would be considered "unreasonable." Why? We like to sleep at night, too, DUMBASS! I don't ignore 17-6-26. I haven't been taught to, loser. It's a pointless, meaningless code section.

When you actually have a law degree, OR have actually held a search warrant and affidavit in your hand, come back here to play with the big boys. Til then, stay at the kiddie table where you belong.

[Atticus Finch]

The Sage wrote:

...
When you actually have a law degree ...

1. lol

2. Do you think that the search warrant on Kathryn Johnston's house was served at a reasonable time and in a reasonable manner? I sure don't. What is reasonable for drug dealers is not reasonable for non-drug dealers.

3. Who needs a warrant suppressed. that is for guilty people. I am more concerned about getting fair compensation for fruitless searches on innocent people. But, like I said, not in Georgia. Too medieval there.

[The Sage]

I can tell you don't have a law degree because you don't think like a lawyer.

There was not a problem with the TIME that they served the search warrant at her house. There was not a problem with HOW they executed the search warrant.

The problem was that they executed the search warrant there at all! This was a frightened, 92 year old woman living alone with a gun. Her family was so worried about her getting raped that they got her a gun. If they really cared, they would have moved her in with them, but that's another discussion.

The cops truly believed there were drugs in that house. They lied on a search warrant in order to get in there. They weren't there at an unreasonable hour. And forcing a door open on a house when you have a search warrant is not unreasonable. What is unreasonable is to LIE about having PC to get that search warrant in the first place.

So many people are complaining about no knock warrants because of this incident. That is stupid, because this really wasn't a no knock warrant. A no knock warrant means the cops don't announce themselves until they are coming through your door. In this case, the cops were trying to break through her door for about 10 minutes. Just enough time for a frightened old woman to grab a gun. Again, the problem was not that this was a "no knock" warrant, because the cops were announcing themselves. Believe me, they were. They weren't there at an unreasonable hour. The ONLY problem with this warrant was that they GOT ONE, PERIOD!

Fruitless searches? You make it sound like the if a cop searches a house and doesn't find drugs, it's because there were NEVER drugs there. Get a freaking clue. You know, drug dealers don't keep an endless supply of drugs at their houses at all times. They DO run out. In fact, in my experience, they don't keep a lot of drugs around just in case the cops do show up!

[Atticus Finch]

There was a problem with time and the manner of the Neal Street warrant. Specifically, if they had served at a more reasonable time of day, and had been more patient at the door, then they could have sorted out the mix up without shooting Ms. Johnston and then planting drugs in her house. That would have been the reasonable thing to do. That didn't happen because they chose to serve at an unreasonable time and an unreasonable manner.

Furthermore, the cops did not announce, or at least they did not announce in a reasonable manner -- a reasonable manner being defined as announcement sufficient so that Ms. Johnston could:(i) perceive it; and (ii) trust it. For example, police cars in her front yard with sirens and flashers going, and dashcams rolling, would have been reasonable. What they did, announcement-wise, clearly was not.

I don't believe for a second that Ms. Johnston knew she was shooting at cops. I am not even sure she shot her gun at all. Who's word do we have on that?

[The Sage]

You don't know that the cops did not announce. You weren't there. I assure you, they did. Cops ALWAYS announce because it is in their best interest to. Do you think they want to be mistaken for a burglar? They were banging on her door for a good 5 minutes before they gained entry. She could have looked outside and seen them in that time. I'm not putting blame on her at all, I'm just saying she did have time to look out the window.

Yes, she did shoot her gun ONE time. We know she had a gun because her family said they gave her one. People like you annoy the sh*t out of me. You don't know what you are talking about, but you'll make stuff up and cast dispersions where none are warranted.

You really have shown your ignorance and stupidity. The warrant was served around 7pm. 7pm is an unreasonable time? Do you know how retarded that is? So cops can't serve search warrants after 7pm? Hmmmm, I guess that means all the drug dealers have to do is wait until after 7pm in your world, then start dealing! Seriously, dude, do you even think about what you are saying before you say it?

They didn't know there was a little old lady inside. They thought there was a kilo of cocaine in there with a drug dealer. They should have verified it, but they didn't. They lied, they rushed, and they royally F-ed up! You don't have to complain about stuff that they didn't even do, or stuff that is totally irrelevant. What they did is bad enough without you adding stupid sh*t.

[lewis]

internal affairs will find more and more cases of policemen abusing autority. young boys from highschool being put into positions of power that quickly gives attitude.how many more innocent people will die before all law enforcment is put under closer supervision that is of an unbias opinion.

[Atticus Finch]

The Sage wrote:

...
Yes, she did shoot her gun ONE time....

who's word are you relying on here?

[The Sage]

Finch, I'll take anyone's word over you! You have clearly demonstrated YOU are a big fat liar who makes stuff up when you don't know what you're talking about.

I remember when you suggested this whole thing was partly due to the fact that cops executed this search warrant at "an unreasonable time of day." Unreasonable?? 7:30PM is unreasonable?? Cops can only execute search warrants from 9am to 5pm in your ideal world?? What are you, retarded? That would just allow the drug dealers to bury their drugs some where during the day, then as soon as 7:30pm rolls around, they can start selling again, since after 7pm is "unreasonable" in your world.

You're good for a laugh. But your lack of knowledge and common sense is even more laughable!