Free Minds & Free Markets
A St. Paul, Minnesota family claims in a lawsuit that police
officers who conducted a wrong-door raid on their home shot their
dog, and then forced their three handcuffed children to sit near
the dead pet while officers ransacked the home. The lawsuit, which
names Ramsey County, the Dakota County Drug Task
Force, and the DEA, and asks for $30 million in civil rights
violations and punitive damages after a wrong-door raid, also
claims that the officers kicked the children and deprived one of
them of her diabetes medication.
The suit also alleges that one of the lead officers with the
task force "provided false information" in order to get a warrant
to raid the Franco family's home. (That information being the
Franco family's address, and not that of their supposedly criminal
neighbor Rafael Ybarra.)
And boy, did Ybarra miss out on a horrific raid. :
But on the night of July 13, 2010, the task force broke down the
Francos' doors, "negligently raided the home of plaintiffs, by
raiding the wrong home and physically brutalizing all the
above-named occupants of said house," the complaint states.
Even after learning that they were in the wrong house, the
complaint states, the drug busters stayed in the Francos' home and
kept searching it.
They "handcuffed all of the inhabitants of the plaintiffs' home
except plaintiff Analese Franco who was forced, virtually naked,
from her bed onto the floor at gunpoint by officers of the St. Paul
Police Department SWAT team and officers of the St. Paul Police
Department."
The complaint states: "Upon forcibly breaching the plaintiffs'
home, defendants terrorized the plaintiffs at gun and rifle
"Each plaintiff was forced to the floor at gun and rifle point
and handcuffed behind their backs.
"Defendants shot and killed the family dog and forced the
handcuffed children to sit next to the carcass of their dead pet
and bloody pet for more than an hour while defendants continued to
search the plaintiffs' home."
One child "was kicked in the side, handcuffed and searched at
gunpoint," the family says.
Another child, a girl, "a diabetic, was handcuffed at gunpoint
and prevented by officer from obtaining and taking her medication,
thus induced a diabetic episode as a result of low-blood sugar
Shawn Scovill of the taskforce may have raided the wrong house,
but he didn't want to let the opportunity to rifle through
someone's things go to waste. So he and his team ransacked the
Franco house for over an hour, and managed to find a .22 caliber
pistol in the "basement bedroom of Gilbert Castillo," which the
suit says they attributed to the head of the Franco household,
Roberto Franco. According to the suit, Franco was convicted of
unlawful possession of a firearm, and remains behind bars. (If
anyone can weigh in on the legal loophole that might allow evidence
seized during a wrong-door raid to be used in court, please fill me
in. Also, are Minnesota gun laws that strict?)
Since the DEA is named in the suit, the Francos' legal team will
likely find itself going head-to-head with Obama administration
lawyers, who
before the Ninth
Circuit. Short recap of the proceedings: The DOJ sought a summary
dismissal of a lawsuit filed against seven DEA agents for their
rough treatment of a family of four--mother, father, two very young
daughters--during a wrong-door raid conducted during the Bush
administration. The Ninth Circuit, , and drew a bright
line between how adults are treated during raids, and how children
are treated during raids.
So there's reason to hope that any request of a summary
dismissal of the Francos' case (by local law or federal attorneys)
won't fly based simply on allegations that the children were
cuffed, kicked, deprived of medicine, and made to sit near their
dead pet for an hour. But I don't think suing over the wrong-door
aspect will get the Franco family very far, unless they can prove
the mistake on the warrant was intentional and that the officers
were aware of the address error before the raid was
conducted.
Mike Riggs is a staff writer at The Atlantic Cities.
Follow Mike Riggs on
Reason In Your Inbox!
11.13.14 2:04 pm
11.13.14 9:20 am
11.12.14 3:07 pm
GET REASON MAGAZINE
Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online
Video Game Nation:
How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
And much more.
advertisement
Scott Shackford
Nick Gillespie, Meredith
Bragg & Joshua Swain
Lauren Galik
Matt Welch
Peter Suderman
Matt Welch
Matt Welch
Jacob Sullum
Jacob Sullum
Scott Shackford
J.D. Tuccille
Charles Oliver
Matt Welch
Matt Welch
Patrick Hannaford
Scott Shackford
Emily Ekins
Emily Ekins
Emily Ekins & Melanie Sitzer
Brian Doherty
Kevin Franciotti
Ronald Bailey提问回答都赚钱
> 问题详情
In the USA children start school when they are five years old． In some states they must st
悬赏：0&&答案豆&&&&提问人：匿名网友&&&&提问收益：0.00答案豆&&&&&&
In the USA children start school when they are five years old． In some states they must stay in school (11) they are sixteen． Most students are seventeen or eighteen years old when they (12) school． There are two kinds of schools in the United States: public schools and pri-cate(私立)schools．(13)children go to public schools． Their parents do not have to(14)their education because the schools (15) money from the government． If a child goes to a private school，his parents have to get enough money for his schooling ． Some parents still (16) private schools，though they are much more expensive．Today about half of the high school students(17) unwersities after they finish the secondary school． A student at a state university does not have to pay very much if his parents (18 in that state． But many students(19) while they are studying at universities．In this way they (20)good working habits and live by their own hands．( )11．A．and B．though C．until D．since
发布时间：&&截止时间：
查看最佳答案前请先输入下方的验证！
网友回答&(共0条)
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&5.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&3.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&5.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&5.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&5.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&5.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&3.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&5.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&3.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&12.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&12.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&3.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&5.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&3.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&5.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&3.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&3.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&5.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&5.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&20.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&20.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&5.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&1.00元收益
回答悬赏问题预计能赚取&3.00元收益
为你请到的专家
&&&&采纳率：76%&&&
&&采纳率：97%&&&
&&采纳率：88%&&&
&&&&采纳率：25%&&&
&&采纳率：90%&&&
[] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] []