Category: Cops
Highest Recorded Number Since FOP Began Collecting This Data
Washington, DC – Patrick Yoes, National President of the Fraternal Order of Police, released the following statement regarding the National FOP’s year-end report on officers shot and killed in the line of duty:
“Last year, over 330 police officers were shot in the line of duty. With the COVID-19 pandemic behind us and after so many Americans have seen the tragic consequences of the defund the police movement, it was our hope that these numbers would be a high-water mark. We were wrong.
“Instead, 378 officers were shot in the line of duty in 2023, the highest number the FOP has ever recorded. Thankfully, because of dramatic improvements in medical trauma science and anti-ballistic technology, the lethality of these attacks has been reduced and only 46 of the officers shot in the line of duty were killed. There were 115 ambush-style attacks on law enforcement officers this year, which resulted in 138 officers shot, 20 of whom were killed.
“Many will often look at this data and just see numbers, but we MUST remember that they represent heroes—fathers, mothers, sons, and daughters. This scale of violence against our officers is horrifying and simply unsustainable. It is no wonder that our profession is facing a recruitment and retention crisis. What father or mother would want their child to become an officer knowing the dangers they face every day?
“When this Congress convened, I asked that they act swiftly and pass the Protect and Serve Act, which would address the national problem of ambushes and unprovoked attacks on our nation’s law enforcement officers. They have not done so. Today, given these numbers, what more would it take for lawmakers in Washington to see how necessary it is to pass this legislation?
“I call on Americans in every community across the country to join us in taking a stand—to say, ‘Enough is Enough!’ Truthfully, the violence against those sworn to protect and serve is beyond unacceptable; it’s a stain on our society, and it must end. It is incumbent upon our elected officials and community leaders to stand up, support our heroes, and speak out against the violence against law enforcement officers.”
Categories
We Are Losing Fans
ShutterstockAlabama’s constitutional, or “permitless,” concealed carry law is coming under further fire from another elected official in the state.
Last week we reported that Mobile County Sheriff Paul Burch was gathering information to try to get legislation introduced requiring a permit for 18- to 20-year-olds. Now, the mayor of Alabama’s capital city has signed a local ordinance putting further restrictions on the law.
The ordinance, signed by Mayor Steven Reed on September 6, requires anyone carrying a concealed firearm to also carry a photo ID, a restriction not currently contained in Alabama’s carry law. Reed contends that the law alleviating permit requirements for carrying a concealed firearm has hindered the ability of law enforcement officers to seize “illegal guns.”
Under the Montgomery ordinance, police can confiscate a concealed firearm if the gun holder is not carrying a photo ID. It further stipulates that the firearm would remain in police custody until the gun holder pays a fine and provides proof of purchase to the local precinct within 30 days.
“The permitless carry bill took away an important way for law enforcement officers to take illegal handguns,” Reed said during Friday’s bill signing ceremony. “What we hope this will do is maybe give us a little bit of movement back to being able to take some of those guns.”
Not everyone was thrilled with the new ordinance, however. One of the questions opponents have posed is exactly how officers are going to determine if a gun is “illegal.” And exactly what makes a gun “illegal” when being carried concealed in a constitutional carry state.
There is also the issue of Alabama’s firearms preemption law. And one person who says the Montgomery scheme violates that law just happens to be Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall.
“The Montgomery City Council’s ordinance related to firearms violates state law,” a spokesperson for the AG’s office said in a statement. “The Code of Alabama plainly states that the Legislature is the sole regulator of firearms and related matters.”
In fact, the preemption law states: “The purpose of this section is to establish within the Legislature complete control over regulation and policy pertaining to firearms, ammunition, and firearm accessories in order to ensure that such regulation and policy is applied uniformly throughout this state to each person subject to the state’s jurisdiction and to ensure protection of the right to keep and bear arms recognized by the Constitutions of the State of Alabama and the United States.”
It’s likely that the state will choose to sue Reed and Montgomery over the ordinance sometime soon. We’ll keep an ear to the ground and update TTAG readers should that happen or if other action is taken concerning the ordinance.
Categories
1997 Pearl High School shooting
The Baker family was about to sell their property when a criminal hid in their home. They were not prepared for what came next.
KALISPELL, Mont.—Vicki Baker was ready to close the sale of her house in McKinney, Texas, in July four years ago. She and her new husband were settling into a new home in Montana. Her daughter, Deanna Cook, lived in the McKinney house pending the sale closing.
She said the future seemed as bright and boundless as the view from her Montana mountaintop home.
On July 25, 2020, the sale was canceled, the house had more than $50,000 in damage courtesy of the McKinney Police Department’s Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team, and a fugitive was lying dead in what had been Baker’s master bedroom.
Baker and the public interest law firm Institute for Justice have petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear her claim that the damage constitutes a taking under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. As such, the city would be obligated to provide Baker just compensation for the damage.
The city of McKinney denies that it owes Baker anything because the police were legally exercising their power while responding to an emergency. McKinney appears to have legal precedent on its side.
“Our appellate counsel will be responding in opposition to Ms. Baker’s request to the Supreme Court to hear an appeal of her case,” Denise Lessard, McKinney’s senior media & public relations manager, wrote in an email to The Epoch Times.
advertisement
However, Jeffrey Redfern, who is representing Baker, said the lower courts got it wrong. He said those courts claim to have found exceptions to the takings clause where none are listed.
Premium Picks
Texas Family Demands Public Apology After SWAT Team Raids Wrong House
Texas Hostages Escaped Synagogue as FBI SWAT Team Rushed In
DOJ Charges Foreign Nationals on Alleged Swatting Operations Against Government Officials
He pointed out that when the Fifth Amendment was written, the United States had no professional law enforcement agencies.
“So I think the idea that, you know, James Madison, when he was drafting this would have thought that there was an unwritten sort of secret exception for a type of government officer, that he couldn’t have even imagined yet, is pretty far out there,” he told The Epoch Times.
Redfern said the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the Constitution requires payment for property damage under the Fifth Amendment’s takings clause.
The takings clause states, “No person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
In its petition, the Institute for Justice stated that such compensation should be considered an expense of providing public safety.
“As a society, we pay for police salaries, training, equipment, and the cost of running a criminal justice system. We should also pay for the damage that the police must sometimes inflict on innocent property owners,” the Institute for Justice’s petition reads.
Vicki Baker looks through the almost $60,000 in receipts for repairs she had to make to her house after the 2020 raid by the McKinney Police SWAT team. Michael Clements/The Epoch Times
Redfern said the raid on Baker’s property was just as much a taking as if the city had demolished the house to make way for a road. This concept has been enshrined in Supreme Court decisions as far back as 1871, he said.
“The U.S. Supreme Court recognized in a pretty famous case involving the building of a dam that when the government destroys private property physically, that’s also a taking,” Redfern said.
Baker said her ordeal began when her phone rang on that Saturday afternoon in 2020. She was in Montana when her daughter, Cook, called to tell her that a SWAT team had surrounded the McKinney house.
Baker’s former part-time handyman, Wesley Little, had barricaded himself in the home with a 15-year-old girl. Cook relayed the seriousness of the situation to her mother with an ominous statement.
“She said, ‘Mom, you don’t know how bad this man is,’” Baker told The Epoch Times.
Little released the teen, who told police he was armed and in no mood to surrender. Little told police negotiators the same thing. Eventually, the SWAT team decided to go in after the fugitive.
Before it was over, windows were broken, the garage door was smashed in, and everything in the house—walls, floors, and furniture—was saturated with tear gas.
Little kept his promise not to be taken alive by shooting himself in Baker’s bedroom.
“On my beautiful, beautiful, beautiful bed,” she said.
Baker is not the only Institute for Justice client left holding the bag after a SWAT team raid, according to Redfern.
Carlos Pena has owned and operated NoHo Printing and Graphic Design for more than 30 years. On Aug. 3, 2022, he was in the shop that he had leased in North Hollywood, California, for 13 years when he was confronted by a man running from U.S. Marshals, court records state.
Carlos Pena shows some of the damage done to his business by a Los Angeles SWAT team. Courtesy Institute for Justice
The fugitive knocked him to the ground and then ran into the shop. Stunned, Pena got up as the Marshals ordered him away from the building, according to court records.
“I didn’t realize exactly what was going on,” Pena told The Epoch Times. “I was out of it because you never think that this is going to happen to you.”
The Los Angeles police SWAT team was called to assist. The team raided the business using tactics similar to those used in McKinney.
Pena said that when it was over, his business had holes in the ceiling and walls. There were footprints on some of his equipment, and boxes of supplies were torn open, exposing the contents to tear gas that flooded the building. In court, he claimed that there had been $60,000 in damage.
“I saw all the work of my life thrown away,” Pena said.
The fugitive escaped, court records state.
Pena and Baker contacted their respective insurance companies and city officials for help with repair and cleanup costs.
advertisement
Baker’s home insurance provider, which she says was very sympathetic, said there was little she could do other than pay for cleaning up the blood from Little’s suicide. Most homeowner policies don’t cover damage sustained through government action.
The city’s insurance carrier, the Texas Municipal League, sent an Aug. 20, 2020, letter advising that neither the city nor any of its employees were responsible for the damage.
“The officers have immunity while in the scope and course of their job duties. For this reason, we must respectfully deny this claim in its entirety,” Yvonne Cantu, a claims specialist for the Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool, wrote in the letter.
Interior damage sustained to Vicki Baker’s house in Texas during the 2020 raid by a SWAT team. Courtesy Deanna Cook
On March 3, 2021, Baker and the Institute for Justice sued the city in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
Redfern said that after Judge Amos L. Mazzant denied the city’s request to dismiss Baker’s suit, the city offered her $50,000 to settle.
“Vicki was willing to settle the case, but only if the city adopted a policy to ensure that anyone in Vicki’s situation in the future would also be compensated,” Redfern said. “The city refused.”
Ultimately, Mazzant ordered the city to pay Baker $59,656.65.
The city appealed, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed that ruling on Oct. 11, 2023.
“The city recognized the unique effects on Ms. Baker when it offered her the full amount of her damages. Regrettably, she rejected the city’s offer. However, we are pleased with the Fifth Circuit’s ruling,” Lessard wrote in her email to The Epoch Times.
Redfern agreed that police sometimes must damage property in emergency situations, as the Fifth Circuit court outlined in its ruling. However, he said violence is engaged in to protect society, not just the individual property owner.
“It’s not about wrongdoing [by police] … but what’s the fair way to allocate that [financial] burden? Is that something that society as a whole should bear? Or is it something that we dump on one random, innocent, unlucky homeowner?” Redfern asked.
Pena said that after the raid, he lost the lease on his store, most of his big clients, and almost all of his walk-in business. He now works from his garage doing whatever jobs he can get with second-hand equipment. His wife, who had retired, has gone back to work.
Los Angeles Police Department’s SWAT team and K9 officers prepare to rescue hostages on Dec. 13, 2017. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times
“I’ve lost about 80 percent of my income,” Pena said.
In July 2023, Pena sued the city of Los Angeles over the raid. According to court records, city officials ignored his claims for compensation. In March, the court denied his claims on the basis that the police were engaged in a legitimate law enforcement action.
Pena said he hasn’t decided whether to appeal the ruling.
Ivor Pine, deputy director of communications for the Los Angeles City Attorney’s office, declined an interview request.
“We do not comment on pending litigation,” Pine wrote in an email to The Epoch Times.
Pena, like Baker, doesn’t dispute the legitimacy of the police operation.
“The judge denied it, alleging that the SWAT team is immune because they were doing their job. So, in other words, it’s Carlos Pena’s [property], and so he has to pay. It’s ridiculous,” Pena said.
When asked whether he is concerned that a victory in Baker’s case could chill police responses to situations that may result in property damage, Redfern said he expects the opposite effect.
“When we’ve talked to police officers who’ve been involved in these cases, they have generally told us that they were under the impression that the property owner was going to get compensated,” he said.
“I think they would be more likely to hesitate if they knew that they were going to be visiting financial ruin on an innocent septuagenarian retiree who has no idea where she’s going to get the money to fix her house.”
SWAT teams advance through a parking lot after a gunman opened fire at a King Sooper’s grocery store in Boulder, Colo., on March 22, 2021. Chet Strange/Getty Images