TheAgitator.com
Another Isolated Incident
Friday, March 28th, 2008Two, actually. Both involve police intercepts of packages using the DHL delivery service on the campus at Duke University.
In the latest, police intercepted a package of marijuana bound for a fraternity house, then raided the place in full SWAT attire when one of the fraternity members signed for it. One of the residents describes the raid:
I am writing to share both my relief over the dropped charges against my housemate, senior Eric Halperin, as well as my continued anger at the blatant abuse of power by the Durham Police Department. On the morning of Feb. 27, our home off East Campus was raided by a team of State Bureau of Investigation agents and members of DPD. Without warning, our front door was knocked down and a handful of fully armed officers entered our home. Subsequently, we were ordered to the ground at the behest of assault rifles, dragged across the floor, hand-cuffed and forced to strip naked. In carrying out their search warrant, police officers destroyed hundreds of dollars of our personal property. Upon failing to find anything incriminating, my friend, Halperin, was falsely charged with drug trafficking without any investigation or evidence, except his signing for a DHL package not addressed to him.
It took a month, but police have now dropped all charges against Halperin. The earlier incident followed almost the same formula, except it took place in a dorm room. In that case too, the charges against the Duke student were dropped.
Even assuming it’s appropriate to arrest a college student who signs for a package of marijuana addressed to someone else, why the SWAT tactics? Did the police department really think the fraternity was going to put up a fight? (Note: It was also the Durham police department that gave us this photo—discussion on that here.) Last month, there was a similar incident at LSU, in which a SWAT team raided a college student’s home based on an anonymous tip that there might be some pot inside. They found nothing.
For some righteous outrage on the case, check out the "Liestoppers Board," a site set up by the parents of the wrongly accused Duke lacrosse team.
Wait a minute — the police intercepted the package at the DHL station? How does that happen? Drug detection machines? These are the same guys that can’t get accurate information from human informants yet they can find one box of drugs amidst the thousands that pass through this DHL station every day. Sounds like the SWAT team leader’s kid couldn’t get into this fraternity.
Also, maybe it’s a typo, but it’s kind of funny how there was 27 pounds in the box at the DHL station, but only 17 when it got to the frat house. Party at SWAT headquarters this weekend!!!
Commercial companies such as DHL have far fewer restrictions on when they can open/search packages moving through their distribution system than the U.S. Post Office for instance. Additionally, enforcement agencies often times put pressure on these commercial companies and/or have cozy information sharing agreements with them that pretty much allow these agencies to ignore traditional 4th Amendment protections.
As such, concerned customers should read the fine print before doing business with any shipping or domestic mailbox business and either seek changes to problematic policies and/or take their business elsewhere.
These aggrieved students should start with Open Records Requests to the State Bureau of Investigation & Police Department to find out exactly what information they had and how they acquired it prior to the raid along with any written agreements in place between the enforcement agencies and commercial companies such as DHL.
A website lambasting companies such as DHL that put their customers at risk by sharing information with government agencies absent a judicial warrant probably wouldn’t hurt either assuming that was the case here….
so let’s recap. a deeply flawed “rape” investigation of a duke fraternity is discovered to be a farce. the resulting brouhaha exposes the durham DA and the durham PD as either incompetent or corrupt, making them the laughingstock of the world. the stink becomes so bad that the DA is actually forced from office for his malfeasance, an *unheard-of* thing.
and now the durham PD is raiding….a duke fraternity?? on the theory that the juarez cartel is moving into the greek world??
what an amazing coincidence. the miracle is, they didn’t shoot anyone. see, THIS is why people still make fun of the south. (and before anyone rushes in to defend southern honor, i’m a son of dixie: the side that lost the war due to, evidently, a genetic inability to imagine they might be wrong sometimes.)
Wayne: INAL, but from what I’ve read, there are 2 possible legal designations for a package – Mail and Cargo.
Mail requires a warrant to inspect. To be considered mail, it must be handled by the USPS.
Cargo is for any package not carried by the USPS. The government can open and inspect cargo at it’s pleasure.
Glad you found thoese stories, I read about them last night when I was at Duke for a class. Luckily the guys were white and students at Duke, an elite private university with resources to defend these guys. I’m sure the charges would not have been dropped if the suspects had been poor black residents of Durham….
Perhaps this indicates a different approach to choosing a university: pick one where the city’s cops are not knuckle-dragging mouth breathing goons. Of course, that would narrow the choices considerably. Surely this time the university will raise the issue with the city authoritahs. It is in the best interests of both the university and the city that this situation be changed for the better, dramatically and quickly. Unfortunately for Duke, they cannot easily move away from this city. If they could, I am sure they would.
[...] in General spiffiness Good recap at The Agitator of a raid where innocent lives were put at extreme risk because of some weed. Yes, [...]
Oh and Radley did not mention that according the “police reports” the package contained 36 lbs of weed when they took possession and subsequently delivered the package to the kids.
After the raid, though the package had NOT been opened, it was 9 lbs short!
No explanation has been offered.
Oh and for a most excellent lesson on the current state of our legal industry in this nation, go spend some time getting more familiar with the DUKE LAX case. LitStoppers is the place to do so. You will get sick, and as Radley continues to point out to us that this stuff goes on all across the nation every day!
You can’t make this stuff up!
If there was truly a concern for the wellbeing (allegedly) of the citizens of Durham county, the police would go after the sender not the recipient. Going after the ‘to’ and not the ‘from’ just shows the hatred the PD has for the Duke students.
#2 Terry
Sorry for screwing up the quotes in #10. This is how it was supposed to be.
#2 Terry
This is something that keeps haunting me. The White House was seriously opposed to allowing telcos to be sued or prosecuted for cooperating with the government in turning over call records without a court order.
One has to wonder if that’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the Bush administration trampling privacy rights without any kind of court oversight.
When the government can get around virtually all privacy rights, then those rights no longer exist.
Maybe the SWAT team members had just finished a marition of watching Taps? Otherwise I can see no logical reason to have a search warrent on a frat house like this, but I cant seeany logical reason for swat team to be used most of the times now a days.
Why the SWAT team? Well, how else can they justify having all of that cool para-military stuff? They gotta use it sometime or the budget’s just gonna dry up!
Why the SWAT team? Yeah why have people trained in entry tactics make an entry. Why not have the girl scouts do it? Oh yeah, because with better training and teamwork, it’s safer for everyone. Perhaps Radley would rather an “ad-hoc” group of cops got together to searve search warrants instead of a team who has worked and trained together….Yeah, that has to be a better idea…/sarcasm
Patrick:
Or, you could have a couple of uniformed cops politely knock on the door to the fraternity house, ask for the guy who signed for the package, and question/arrest him without tearing the door off its hinges, throwing people the ground at gunpoint, and strip-searching them.
Given that this is a fraternity of college students, that the suspect was an honors student with no priors, and that this was a nonviolent crime, wouldn’t that be a better option?
Right, and as you waiting for them to politely go get the person in question, the neighborhood water pressure drops dramatically. The point being it needs to be the safest and effective way, and your way, while nice and polite, won’t lead to many seizures. Which I’m sure is OK with you. I’ll even agree that a drug seizure isn’t worth losing a life over, but that’s the cops job.
You’re clearly be willing to bet someone else’s life on such a thing, and most times you’d end up being right, but it only takes one time being wrong. As you point out there are certainly enough violence inherent in these raids, having less trained cops doing them isn’t going to decrease that.
The other point being, this was a frat house, but I imagine they only account for something less than 1% of all warrants served. What about the other 99%? Still OK with that? Again you’re betting someone’s life that everyone in the location to be searched is going to be cooperative. A door can be fixed, hurt feeling and bruised egos heal, even embarrasment fades, but someone dying is forever. I for one believe it’s safer to use a team that trains and practices together.
Patrick, you’re not making any sense.
Yes, a well-trained SWAT team executing raids on nonviolent offenders is preferable to a poorly trained or untrained group of police officers. Who is advocating the latter?
How about not using violent tactics on nonviolent offenders at all? You say I’m “willing to bet someone’s life” on the small chance that some drug dealer will knowingly decide to take on a raiding SWAT team. I guess I am. That’s the risk you take when sign up to be a cop. And you’re willing to risk the lives of people who didn’t sign up for that risk to make sure small-time dealers don’t flush drugs the toilet (and let’s face it, if the guy’s supply was small enough to be flushable, he wasn’t a major dealer).
I don’t know how long you’ve been reading, but I’ve documented hundreds of raids, even by well-trained SWAT teams, that went violently wrong in a hurry. The margin for error is too low. The mistake can be on the part of the SWAT team or on the person they’re targeting. But it only takes a small mistake in judgment to get someone killed.
And over what? Dope? What’s the point? Do you really think it’s appropriate to be kicking down doors and invading the homes of American citizens to stop people from getting high?
You’ve documented “hundreds” of raids mostly based on what the person being raided has claimed, not by what actually happened. This case is a perfect example. You have no idea what took place in the frat house, yet you’re perfectly willing to report the student’s side as the truth. I’m willing to admit, I don’t know what happened, and if there was misconduct on the part of the police, I’m certain the fine upstanding students at Duke will see to it that the appropriate complaints are made.
Are there mistakes, misconduct, criminal behavior on the part of the police? certainly there are. That is what gives you your kernel of truth. But the real truth of the matter is that in virtually every circumstance these activities are undertaken with the safety of everyone at the top of the list of priorities. They are done safey, legally and ethically. That’s the truth.
What you fail to account for time and time again are the number of raids that are successully conducted, where evidence is properly seized, and where risk to human life on both sides of the issue is minimized. To demand perfection from any system is fallacious and intellectually dishonsest. That failures in this system can result in serious injury or death is tragic, but there’s no way to make it perfect. If there was someone would have already thought of it.
It is appropriate to follow the U.S. Constitution, the laws of the land and rulings of judges appointed or elected into office. Right now drugs are illegal, the law allows for the reasonable search of citizens, and SWAT and other tactical entry teams are best suited for reducing the risk to everyone. You have come out against the “militarization” of law enforcement. Having served in both disciplines I can say that’s a false analogy. That being said, if a warrant needs to be served, and the threat or danger is not known, who better to serve the warrant than a team specfically trained to do so, be they called SWAT or SAFE or whatever the acronym? You condemn the practice but offer no alternative.
patrick, you seem to be quite against the idea of holding cops accountable for their deadly mistakes and screwups. since you say you’ve “served on both disciplines” (cop & military), is if safe to assume you’re a cop? a cop who’s against cops being held accountable for their mistakes?
“are there mistakes, misconduct, criminal behavior on the part of the police? certainly there are.”
why then should these things not be pointed out? why then should there not be a call to punish and **prosecute** the cops who’ve done it? whining about how most of the time cops do a good job isn’t going to cut it: if john q. citizen has a 40-year clean record and then gets busted for causing the death of another – say, a *cop* – cops aren’t going to rise to his defense. DA’s aren’t going to say “accidents happen”. should a harried mom forget her baby in the car, and it dies of heatstroke, the cops will charge and arrest her. for a tragic mistake. should a COP accidentally shoot someone through a closed door – as balko has documented – HE faces no charges. is that fair? is that right?
or is it exactly what it seems to be: that cops are held to a lower standard than non-cops?
look in the mirror. YOU “condemn the practice” of pointing out stupid/dirty cops, but “offer no alternative” except excuses for them, and complaints about bad publicity. was mike nifong arrested by a SWAT team? why not?
Hmmm. Is this the same ‘Patrick the Cop’ who used to frequent TalkLeft’s comment boards? Style and attitude sure look familiar…
No where have I said cops shouldn’t be held accountable for their actions. Nice strawman. It’s pretty clear what I’m opposed to and it isn’t holding cops accountable.
This site is predisposed to fault the police for misconduct based solely on the compaint of someone who has a reason to lie. There’s little to no investigation into what actually happened, except for the occasional search of a plaintiff’s lawsuit, which I’m happy to remind everyone here isn’t evidence of anything.
I’m also not opposed to pointing out times when cops do make mistakes, (those are excellent learning points) or break the laws, (That’s always news anyway, and they deserve to be prosecuted). But that’s not what happens here and you know it. So quit being obtuse. People like Radley seem to try to turn honest police mistakes into misconduct or criminal behavior, and in a system that relies on intent, it’s just not there. Then they turn around and use those examples as proof the system favors cops.
Yes I am the same Patrick from Talk Left, no need to hide behind different names, and I’ve brought up numerous examples of how the Corey Maye story was misused over there. My positions and style and attitude are consistent so I’ll take your observation as a compliment.
Cops are held to the same standard as everyone else. That’s it, You can cite all the anecdotal evidence you want, it doesn’t make your point true. There is injustice in the criminal justice system. It’s a human system too. I guess I forgot how perfect you were.
Ah, yes. I remember you now, Patrick.
You’re the one who said Cory Maye must be guilty, because he has a tattoo.
You also were pretty misinformed about the details of Cory’s case.
This site is predisposed to fault the police for misconduct based solely on the compaint of someone who has a reason to lie.
This is a poor argument. Only guilty people have a reason to lie. Being arrested and/or having your door knocked in doesn’t equal being guilty. Before you knock Radley for bias, you might examine your own.
Also, before you complain about “strawman” arguments, please show where Radley or anyone here has insisted on having a “perfect” system.
Cops are held to the same standard as everyone else. That’s it, You can cite all the anecdotal evidence you want, it doesn’t make your point true.
So if case after case after case of cops who receive lighter penalties than civilians for doing similar things have been documented (as they have), you still won’t believe that cops aren’t held to the same standard as everyone else. I hope you’re able to see how this makes you appear uninterested in objective truth.
Again with the misinformation Radley, and there’s really no reason to lie. You can disagree with my position if you choose to, but lying? I thought you were smarter than that. I can find the TL post if you want me to.
Cops are held to the same standard as everyone else. That’s it, You can cite all the anecdotal evidence you want, it doesn’t make your point true.
This just isn’t true. Just a few examples:
In most places when a police officer is accused of misconduct, he’s usually given anywhere between a week and a month to consult with a lawyer and his union rep before he’s questioned. Pretty sure regular citizens aren’t afforded that privilege. In most states, police officers can have a lawyer present when they’re questioned before a grand jury, can cross examine witnesses, and can’t give “closing statements.” Regular people aren’t allowed to do any of those things, either.
You can disagree with my position if you choose to, but lying?
Not lying — exaggerating for effect, but only a little. You did imply that Cory’s tattoo made him less sympathetic, did you not?
And yes, you were out and out wrong about several details of the case.
Exaggerating for effect….Nice euphamism. Sounds like a lie to me, but at least you admit it. The one area where I was mistaken was asserting a point that you had made, but apparently later had to recant. So yes, there was one thing I said about that case that was wrong, but that’s what I get for listening to you. It wasn’t a no-knock warrant, it wasn’t an all-white jury, the gun was stolen….etc…
When a police officer is accused of misconduct is not the same as when a police officer is accused of a crime. A crime is always misconduct, but misconduct is not always a crime. See the difference? Internal investigations are covered by specific laws that apply to how they can be conducted.
So, Patrick, are you saying that in most states, police officers aren’t allowed to have a lawyer present when they’re questioned before a grand jury, and that they aren’t allowed to cross examine witnesses?
Or is that just “anecdotal?”
Les,
I’m unaware of such a law either in California or anywhere else. Radley say it’s different for cops, maybe it is, but not that I’m aware of. If you disagree with the law, change it, but don’t blame someone for seeking protection if it’s granted by the law. Kinda like, there’s no need to plead the 5th if you’ve got nothing to hide right?
Patrick, that’s just one example of how cops aren’t held to the same standards as civilians. There are many, many others.
Held to a higher standard in many cases too. I would appreciate a link to this law you are referring to.
Les,
Are you there? I was looking for a link to this law. I can’t believe a person accused of crime can be compelled before a grand jury without a lawyer. I believe that is the point you are trying to make. If I’m wrong please corrrect me. Radley first brough it up, perhaps he can direct me to this law. The one where there are separate grand jury process for cops and civilians. Or perhaps is more “exaggerating for effect”
No response….Shocking