Drug Dealer Testifies in Tesler Trial

[The Sage]

That's not a power they have that I am aware of. They either approve a search warrant, or they don't. Please tell me your background in search warrants.

[Atticus Finch]

Sage sed: "That's not a power they have that I am aware of. They either approve a search warrant, or they don't."

That's right. the judge can refuse to sign until any conditions she wants are inserted. Depending upon jurisdiction, she may have the power to insert the conditions on her own (that is, sua sponte), but in every jurisdiction, the judge has at least the power to refuse to sign the warrant until her conditions are met.

I know that you have never seen this happen, but that has nothing to do with what a judge has the power to do. All that means is that you deal with good old boy judges a lot. Do you pay for the door, at least, when nothing turns up?

[petaputa08]

liberal wrote:

<quoted text>Isn't is not it a bad sign that the word of informants are only good whenever its not used against you(police)

take the info with a grain of salt and investigate but knocking down doors and shooting people is a no no. It could have been kids,dogs,alot of things in there. I am sure informants give alot of bad information. Why would you give the right house and risk getting shot yourself by your business cohorts?

[liberal]

petaputa08 wrote:

<quoted text>take the info with a grain of salt and investigate but knocking down doors and shooting people is a no no. It could have been kids,dogs,alot of things in there. I am sure informants give alot of bad information. Why would you give the right house and risk getting shot yourself by your business cohorts?

Huh? Shouldn't you be upset that someone dropped the ball and all they had to go on for this no-knock warrant was an informant? I really find it hard to follow you logic or why you would have an issue with my comment. And honestly if someone's dog got shot by the police during a warrant on the wrong house, it would not have been as big of a news story nor would it likely result in a huge criminal case.

[Atlanta today]

liberal wrote:

<quoted text>Huh? Shouldn't you be upset that someone dropped the ball and all they had to go on for this no-knock warrant was an informant? I really find it hard to follow you logic or why you would have an issue with my comment. And honestly if someone's dog got shot by the police during a warrant on the wrong house, it would not have been as big of a news story nor would it likely result in a huge criminal case.

You're misreading his comment. He's not criticizing you.

He's saying that you should always "consider the source" when relying on information coming from informants, who have their own ulterior motives and have a lot of incentive to give out purposely false information. Basically, this unit was busting into homes and endangering lives (cops and civilians) based on flimsy, inaccurate info.

[The Sage]

Finch, again, I ask you what experience you have with warrants. You keep espousing all of this "knowledge." "Judges can do this, judges can do that." Where is this coming from?

[Atticus Finch]

My superior knowledge of the law. Education and experience.

[Atticus Finch]

Or, to put it another way, Georgia law says:
[quote]17-5-21.....
(a) Upon the written complaint of any certified peace officer of this state ... "judicial officer," may issue a search warrant[/quote]

The use of the word "may" in this Georgia law means that the judicial officer has complete discretion and can refuse to sign the warrant unless and until her conditions are met.

[Mr E]

Atticus Finch does not know what he is talking about.

Warrants are either approved, or declined. Judges can't say "You have to execute the search warrant with 5 marked cars out front or I won't sign it." First, there is no place in a warrant application for such conditions to be set. Second, all you need for a search warrant is "probable cause." You don't have to make the judge feel all warm and fuzzy about how you're going to execute the search warrant.

You took one part of 17-5-21 out of context and tried to make it seem like it supports your claim. That part of 17-5-21 is simply establishing WHICH JUDGES MAY ISSUE a search warrant. The use of the word "may" does not give them the authority to dictate to the police how they do their jobs. Nice try taking things out of context!! Here's the whole paragraph for everyone to see how you took it out of context:

"a) Upon the written complaint of any certified peace officer of this state or its political subdivisions charged with the duty of enforcing the criminal laws and otherwise as authorized in Code Section 17-5-20 under oath or affirmation, which states facts sufficient to show probable cause that a crime is being committed or has been committed and which particularly describes the place or person, or both, to be searched and things to be seized, any judicial officer authorized to hold a court of inquiry to examine into an arrest of an offender against the penal laws, referred to in this Code section as 'judicial officer,' may issue a search warrant for the seizure of the following:"

Show us where in chapter 17 it says judges may impose conditions on the search warrant. I promise you, you won't find them. Also, I think you should do a better job answering The Sage's question. He asked you what your experience with search warrants was. You responded, "my experience and education." Um...that doesn't answer anything! That would be like asking a cook, so what kind of experience do you have as a cook, and him replying "I cook and my training." You clearly don't know mcuh about search warrants. If I had to hazard a guess, you're an undergrad or first year law student who thinks he knows everything.

[GIVE ME A BREAK]

Mr E wrote:

Atticus Finch does not know what he is talking about.
Warrants are either approved, or declined. Judges can't say "You have to execute the search warrant with 5 marked cars out front or I won't sign it." First, there is no place in a warrant application for such conditions to be set. Second, all you need for a search warrant is "probable cause." You don't have to make the judge feel all warm and fuzzy about how you're going to execute the search warrant.
You took one part of 17-5-21 out of context and tried to make it seem like it supports your claim. That part of 17-5-21 is simply establishing WHICH JUDGES MAY ISSUE a search warrant. The use of the word "may" does not give them the authority to dictate to the police how they do their jobs. Nice try taking things out of context!! Here's the whole paragraph for everyone to see how you took it out of context:
"a) Upon the written complaint of any certified peace officer of this state or its political subdivisions charged with the duty of enforcing the criminal laws and otherwise as authorized in Code Section 17-5-20 under oath or affirmation, which states facts sufficient to show probable cause that a crime is being committed or has been committed and which particularly describes the place or person, or both, to be searched and things to be seized, any judicial officer authorized to hold a court of inquiry to examine into an arrest of an offender against the penal laws, referred to in this Code section as 'judicial officer,' may issue a search warrant for the seizure of the following:"
Show us where in chapter 17 it says judges may impose conditions on the search warrant. I promise you, you won't find them. Also, I think you should do a better job answering The Sage's question. He asked you what your experience with search warrants was. You responded, "my experience and education." Um...that doesn't answer anything! That would be like asking a cook, so what kind of experience do you have as a cook, and him replying "I cook and my training." You clearly don't know mcuh about search warrants. If I had to hazard a guess, you're an undergrad or first year law student who thinks he knows everything.

Wow, you really know your stuff. Thank for informing us all.
Sometimes I have to wonder if people are providing false information on purpose... It is a good example for me to not always believe what I read.

[Maria Antonia]

Mr E wrote:

Atticus Finch does not know what he is talking about.

I actually know who Mr. Finch is and while I've thought he was purposely decietful in the past, I feel dishonest in not saying that what he stated about himself is, in fact, true.

[Maria Antonia]

The Sage wrote:

The judges has no control over people lying to them.

I have in the past been called as an expert witness. Judges can and do ask questions especially when a witness character is in doubt or the witness is reluctant/ not fully responsive. Bob McDonnell who comes on this forum is an attorney in Atlanta, maybe he'll come out and tell what he knows about this locally.

[GIVE ME A BREAK]

Hey Maria!
How are the mountains??

[Maria Antonia]

GIVE ME A BREAK wrote:

Hey Maria!
How are the mountains??

We've been (thankfully) misty, rainy all day, but the sun just came out and I'm getting ready to run. I'm hoping a good run will make me feel better...I'm reading a most depressing book, stayed up too late last night, went to my youngests honors day and saw a boy smile at her, and haven't spoken to my friend in 2 days...more than you wanted to know, right? How is your porch, I wish I was there!

[GIVE ME A BREAK]

Maria Antonia wrote:

<quoted text>
We've been (thankfully) misty, rainy all day, but the sun just came out and I'm getting ready to run. I'm hoping a good run will make me feel better...I'm reading a most depressing book, stayed up too late last night, went to my youngests honors day and saw a boy smile at her, and haven't spoken to my friend in 2 days...more than you wanted to know, right? How is your porch, I wish I was there!

Wow, that was a lot! I am sorry to hear that you're not up to your best. I hate it when a book depresses me.
Unfortunately it has been drizzly and 'chilly' today, but the porch is still wonderful. I am sure you'd enjoy the view...but being in the mountains, I am sure you're accustomed to a lot of land, peace and quiet.

[Mr E]

Atticus Finch misrepresented GA law. He also did not explain what his experience in search warrants is, so I don't know how you can say what he said is true.

[Maria Antonia]

Atticus Finch wrote:

My superior knowledge of the law. Education and experience.

No, Mr. E, I'm referring to this statement. It is true. I've already stated that I've found him deceitful in the past. Good Lord, if you go to file a bad check warrant in the Magistrate Office and they don't know you, the Magistrate Judge will ask you questions after you fill out the application.

[Maria Antonia]

GIVE ME A BREAK wrote:

<quoted text>
...peace and quiet...

You've probably put your finger on the problem right there friend.:)

[GIVE ME A BREAK]

Maria Antonia wrote:

<quoted text>
You've probably put your finger on the problem right there friend.:)

Meaning, you don't get peace and quiet? I have been spoiled with all that I have...

[Mr E]

So what is Atticus Finch's knowledge and experience with search warrants? He hasn't demonstrated any real knowledge to us. He took one code section out of context to try to make his point. That doesn't exactly show me he knows what he is talking about