TheAgitator.com
Another Isolated Incident (w/ Puppycide)
Thursday, February 5th, 2009Police in Howard County, Maryland conducted a nighttime, no-knock raid on the home of Mike Hasenei, whom they apparently suspected of stealing items from two police cars burglarized last month. They found nothing, but they did shoot and kill Hasenei’s Australian cattle dog. The police say the no-knock raid and tactical entry were necessary because Hasenei is a (legal) gun-owner.
Police spokeswoman Sherry Llewellyn confirmed the raid on Hasenei’s house, noting that police had a search warrant signed by a judge…
Llewellyn confirmed the dog shooting, but said the dog charged police, forcing them to shoot it…
Llewellyn said police had reason to believe a gun was in the residence, which was why they did not knock…
Llewellyn added that when police have reason to believe there might be firearms in a residence, they take precautions to ensure the safety of the officers and anyone inside the house.
“This often includes the use of the tactical team, which is specially trained to deal with potentially dangerous situations,” she said.
Sounds like they need more training.
Hasenei, 39, of the 6600 block of Deep Run Parkway, Elkridge, said he was sleeping shortly after 9 p.m. Jan. 15 when a police tactical team kicked in the door to his house.
He woke up and walked into his living room to find it swarming with officers, he said. When he asked what was going on, he was ordered to get on the ground, and when he asked again, he said, he was knocked to the ground and told he was under arrest.
He wasn’t arrested.
So the police say they used a no-knock and a tactical team to secure the place quickly because they knew Hasenei was a gun owner. Yet Hasenei was able to get up from bed, walk out from his bedroom, and enter his living room before making his first contact with the tactical team. Which shows that all they really succeeded in doing was to provoke a potentially violent confrontation with a guy who at the moment looks to be innocent of any crime.
It’s a good thing he didn’t grab one of his guns on his way out of the bedroom.
Too bad that us legal gun owners have become the targets of no-knock raids, all in the interests of the State and the safety of their minions. I don’t what’s wrong with the old ways of going up and knocking on the door to check things out. To me, it seems like a knee-jerk reaction by the LEOs. Perhaps I could consider a no-knock raid in regards to violent crimes of drugs. I think we’re allowing the police state to go too far.
So do you get that you “law and order / the law is the law” types. The mere fact that you LEGALLY own a gun is sufficient grounds to upgrade to a no-knock raid on your house as opposed to simply trying to talk to you.
Soon you will be disarmed for your own protection from the police. It’s not the liberals coming for your guns, it’s the cops and your beloved drug war.
Australian cattle dogs don’t charge. They do the opposite of charge. They are bred to obey commands, and make people happy. That claim is a load of crap, and anyone who has ever – ever – been in the presence of a AuCaDo knows it.
The reasoning for the no-knock is so backwards, it is astonishing. I would think that (pulling it out of my ass) 99% of people, certainly 99% of people with legally permitted guns probably even 99% of people who might be guilty of some crime, would not consider shooting at police coming to serve a warrant at their house. There is a much higher percentage who will shoot at an unknown intruder who breaks down their door. These police need to work on their reasoning. We’ve seen enough examples now of this tactic failing, both in terms of protecting officer safety and the safety of their targets.
Cop: “Ok, we have a warrant to serve and the guy is a gun owner.”
Rookie cop: “So do we knock on the door in broad daylight, so he won’t freak out.”
Cop: “Fuck no! What we do is dress all in black, wait until the middle of the night, and then barge through the door with weapons drawn and shoot anything that moves.”
Rookie cop: “Brilliant!”
If one ever needed a reason to justify circumventing gun registration laws, this is it.
I think that any case like this one should be brought to the attention of the National Rifle Association. They are in an interesting place, being perceived as pro law-and-order, pro gun rights, and almost universally endorsing Republican candidates (who also often run on pro-police, law-and-order platforms). It would be interesting to see what sort of stand they would take on this. At best, it might bring a powerful ally into the fight against paramilitary policing, and at worst, it would expose the hypocrisy of a powerful lobbying organization.
Hey, you never know, he might have tried to flush a Sig Sauer Rifle, three ammunition magazines, a police gear bag, a county police field procedures manual and guide, and more police-related items down the toliet…
/(hopefully obvious) sarcasm/
This is exactly what I have been worried about. In some places, they have “hot tip lines”, where people are encouraged to call in “illegal gun tips”. Put that together with a no knock mentality, and the dreadful ignorance among the public as to gun legality, and the making of tragedy are plain. (not to mention the obvious way to get rid of the neighbor you don’t like…)
#7 Bill,
Why don’t we go to the ACLU since they fight for all our rights, including our 2nd amendme…..oh, nevermind.
LOL Fritz, I would very much like to be a “card-carrying member” of the NRA and the ACLU, but I always get queasy before signing on with the ACLU for exactly that reason! Still, the day may come…
Actually, the NRA has a great history of standing on the right side in cases like this, and they have always been against gun registration for exactly this reason. They should be notified.
“It’s a good thing he didn’t grab one of his guns on his way out of the bedroom.”
Until yesterday, I would have taken issue with that quote. It’s a good thing for his own sake he didn’t grab a gun on his way out the bedroom.
“The police say the no-knock raid and tactical entry were necessary because Hasenei is a (legal) gun-owner.”
What the fuck! He was not arrested, he had perfectly legal items in his house, why did they even think he broke into some police cars in the first place?
Riddle me this, Batman! What made them think he was the guilty party? Fingerprints left at the scene? Surveillance camera footage? Eye witnesses?
If it was any of these things… he would have been arrested even without the items being recovered.
No, I’m going with they paid an informant to point him out, then went on a late night shopping trip to the guy’s home.
@ #10 Fritz & #11 Bill: That’s no reason not to support the ACLU. The NRA doesn’t focus on Fourth Amendment rights, but you support their stance on the Second and Fourteenth.
Well, the ACLU doesn’t focus on Second Amendment rights, but focuses on the First and Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth. It seems to me that the two are compliments, not substitutes.
John,
Not focusing on 2A law is the excuse used by a lot of right-wing nutjobs for not supporting the ACLU. The truth is they wont support it because of what it does, not what it doesn’t do. That being support rights that get in the way of the “law and order” agenda they love so much.
This is starting to seem book-worthy. There is certainly enough material. I don’t think most people realize that puppycide is Standard Operating Proceedure.
What’s the solution? Obviously a change of police policy, but that doesn’t seem likely. I assume that they are immune from criminal charges, but maybe the victims could start winning some civil suits and change the tide?
John (#15), my problem with the ACLU is not that it “doesn’t focus” on the 2nd Amendment, but that it actively opposes it. Even after the Heller decision on DC’s gun law, the ACLU has maintained that the 2nd Amendment is a collective, not an individual right. I wouldn’t mind a bit if they simply took a neutral stance on it. Second, there is a history of the ACLU coming down on the side of redistributionist policies, but I could probably make peace with that.
Those gripes aside, I am very impressed with the ACLU’s support of (most ;-) ) of the Bill of Rights, and I expect the time will come soon that I will join regardless. But its opposition–not neutrality, but opposition–to Second Amendment rights is a real stumbling block.
Bob,
From what I read in the article, they were after his stepson, not him. So, apparently, the person who was the reason for the “no knock” was not even the subject of the warrant.
#13
I understand your point and agree in this particular case, but what about when it is a non-cop home invasion? Police make their appearance and actions indistinguishable from other criminals, and are justified in killing you if you respond to them mistaking them for criminals. So we’re to be conditioned that within our castle to submit ourselves and our families to all home invasions in case the masked men turn out to be cops? Here in Houston non-cop criminals even yell “Police” as they invade knowing we’re conditioned.
Police are making us extremely vulnerable to non-cop criminal invasions. They are also making those of us who refuse to be vulnerable extremely unsafe when we do walk into our own living rooms armed.
By the way, how un-fucking-American is it they we risk death at the hand of our public servants by taking responsible actions in our own living rooms!?!?
Some on the right also have issues with the ACLU’s stance on abortion rights, so it’s not purely a law-and-order thing. There’s also things like its support for hate crimes legislation. I’ve been a member of both the ACLU and the NRA at various times (though not currently a member of either) and in both cases found myself at odds with the organization’s position on different issues.
‘Police spokeswoman Sherry Llewellyn confirmed the raid on Hasenei’s house, noting that police had a search warrant signed by a judge…’
based on lies the cop told the judge.
‘Llewellyn confirmed the dog shooting, but said the dog charged police, forcing them to shoot it…’
common sense says that any dog’s going to run and see what caused the front door to blow out of it’s door frame.
‘Llewellyn said police had reason to believe a gun was in the residence, which was why they did not knock…’
This is like a bad remake of ‘Red Dawn’ when they’re gathering up registered gun owners. Defies logic in a free society.
Australian Shepherds are fun dogs- you always see them catching frisbees and competing in agility contests. I’ve never heard of anyone ever being bitten by one. The cops lived to break down more doors, kill more dogs, assault more citizens, steal more money…
I feel bad for the guy who lost his dog. Fuck those no-knock cops.
Wait wait…
There’s no reason to believe this guy even owned guns… it appears to me that the gun they’re talking about was what was stolen from the police car.
I first thought he had a registered Sig Sauer, but then it occurred to me, why would the warrant also specify the other items so closely? There would be no way to know how many clips a guy has for his rifle.
I think these are the items that were stolen, and their justification for a no-knock is that there might be a stolen gun… at a house only casually connected to the person on the warrant. That argument is so circular it would roll down a hill.
Who is next on the hit list of people that might be harboring this gun?
Yeah, that sounds logical to me. Let’s break the door down and scare the shit of the residents because we think it’s going to be safer than using the doorbell like hundreds of millions of people (including criminals) do everyday without incident.
Even the cops aren’t so stupid as to really believe that, although they are arrogant enough to think the public is stupid enough to buy it (and, of course, the public does buy it).
The real reason they use no-knock raids is because it’s less safe (and more likely to generate excitement and adrenaline which is really what they want).
These are the kind of assholes who watch movies about futuristic dystopian police states and hope it happens in their lifetimes.
Wait until things in America get real dicey (economically). Oh, they’ll target gun owners alright (for the children).
Cops get stuff stolen: FAIL
Cops target this guy: FAIL
Cops come up with idea for SWAT raid: FAIL
Judge issues warrant: FAIL
Cops can’t get the fuck out of the way of a dog: FAIL
“These are the kind of assholes who watch movies about futuristic dystopian police states and hope it happens in their lifetimes.”
This isn’t confined to futuristic police states. Have you noticed that almost EVERY SHOW on TV features cops as protagonists? Even Animal Planet with its Animal police shows.
It seems that almost every movie made is a cop or slasher movie. And it appears to me that this has come about in only about the last 10 years or so.
I made the mistake of watching Law and Order last night and there was a scene where the ADA’s coerced a doctor to give up protected health information without a court order by threatening to subpoena his charts to look for billing fraud. I’m sure the general public thought that was just great.
I think what really stirs up the nutjobs about the ACLU is there stance on separation of church and state.
#17 | Jefferson
“This is starting to seem book-worthy. There is certainly enough material. I don’t think most people realize that puppycide is Standard Operating Proceedure. What’s the solution?”
Well, there’s my time-worn idea of a national organization of dog owners with the sole focus to reach out to local police departments so as to educate LEOs and dog owners on how to peacefully coexist. What do you think, Jefferson? The major drawback identified so far (by JJ, thank you) is that the costs to the individual members outweight the benefit of collective action.
Sorry, doggies, it’s SWAT roulette for you for now. I’ll keep working on it.
#26 | Jerri Lynn Ward
“Have you noticed that almost EVERY SHOW on TV features cops as protagonists? Even Animal Planet with its Animal police shows. It seems that almost every movie made is a cop or slasher movie. And it appears to me that this has come about in only about the last 10 years or so.”
About two or three years ago it became painfully obvious that EVERY SINGLE news story on the local and national news has government as either the main focus or is somehow worked into the story tangentially. Big +1 karma from me on this, Jerri Lynn.
Perhaps the problem with the ACLU and other civil liberties organizations is that they focus too much on “constitutional rights” and not “human rights.”
“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.” — Lysander Spooner
http://praxeology.net/LS-NT-6.htm
I promise no more anarchist posts today. ;)
“Llewellyn said police had reason to believe a gun was in the residence, which was why they did not knock…”
Bizarro World world logic FTW.
Added bonus, I just wikipedia’d bizarro world, and found this:
“…other Bizarros were created to add to the population including Wonderzarro, Bizarro Flash, “the Yellow Lantern”, Bizarro-Kltpzyxm and Batzarro, the World’s Worst Detective.”
Clearly Batzarro is the police cheif in Howard County!
#20 | HTownTejas
I agree with everything you said. Let me clarify.
I would have prefered for him to kill the home invaders, but after what happened yesterday, I’m sure things would have turned out poorly.
I’m glad he didn’t get his gun because these thugs would have killed him, and I like good people to live.
God, I hate us vs. them. God I hate how “they” created “us”.
Cute. I bet someone gets a commendation.
What’s the solution?
Maybe we should let the police euthanize animals at the pound and get it out of their system there.
If the cops are going to shoot the dogs anyway, they should be trained to go for the throat. In packs, so that shooting one won’t prevent an attack.
I’m tempted to put a “These premises under video surveillance” sign up just to freak these sorts of thugs.
Sounds like a good idea except I think being a thug is kind of like doing opiates. The more you do, the more you want.
Looks like it’s a good time to market my light weight, easy to install Battering Ram proof door!
Let’s see. I have an Australian Shepperd and a gun. So does this mean that if the Police want to talk to me they are to kick my door down?
Those things just increase the chances, Dan. Anyone is eligible, regardless of their dog and/or gun ownership.
I’ll take a door, Bob.
“I’ll take a door, Bob.”
That door dents, but it don’t fall down! Even after the cop wielding it puts his donut down so he can use both hands!
“Dude! Hold my Donut! This door is tough!”
WHAM!!! “Ow!!! I dropped the ram on my foot! $#@! #$%#!”
Zeb, I think you nailed it. The cops’ argument assumes that people are more likely to shoot BECAUSE it’s the police at their door, than they are when *surprised* by people who, at least by their dress, don’t immediately appear to be police.
Who honestly thought this makes sense? If two cops came to the door in daylight does some petty thief with a *registered* gun open up on them? It’s so dumb, and it’s so obvious that it’s dumbd that it’s just pathetic.
But hot damn it’s fun!
A question: is anyone running a database on the judges who sign off on questionable no-knock warrants? It strikes me that the existence of such a database, combined with a stated goal of challenging the performance of judges who are consistently sloppy in examining the grounds for such warrants, might have a sobering effect on the judges, if not the police.
When are they going to start giving people who accidentally shoot cops paid leave from their jobs, like the cops get when they accidentally shoot us?
[...] US-amerikanische Polizeikräfte morden wieder Hunde. Besonders widerlich daran: Es ist völlig legal. D.h. natürlich nicht, dass es legitim ist, auf einen vagen Verdacht hin, fremdes Eigentum zu betreten und Hunde zu erschiessen. (Hunde, wohlgemerkt, die völlig zu Recht Haus und Garten auch als ihr Eigentum ansehen.) | the agitator – Another Isolated Incident (w/ Puppycide) [...]
Great. So X% of American homes are subject to “no knocks” because there is a gun in the home. Oh, and if the cops think that they “have lost the element of surprise”, they can bust down the door then also. List other officially recognized reasons here.
I would sincerely admire the first cop who tells the reporter the truth: “We’re the cops and we will bust down any door we want to bust down. If we want to knock, we will. If we don’t want to, we won’t.”
It’s the logical extension of the “oh my god it’s so dangerous being a police officer” mindset that’s become so prevalent lately.
Perhaps the problem with the ACLU and other civil liberties organizations is that they focus too much on “constitutional rights” and not “human rights.”
The problem with the ACLU is that they’re not interested in criminals having the same rights as the law-abiding. They want criminals to have more rights.
If government practices reasonably honor the rights of law-abiding people, but are eroding the rights of criminals, it would be right and proper to protect the rights of criminals since, if they weren’t protected, law-abiding people could be next.
On the other hand, when governments routinely attack the rights of law-abiding people, efforts to protect the rights of criminals while ignoring those of the law-abiding will not protect the rights of the law-abiding. To the contrary, such efforts to protect crooks will encourage the government to target the less-well-protected rights of law-abiding people.
Were I a governor, I would promise to pardon anyone who shot police officers who broke into an occupied dwelling without either making a bona fide effort to demonstrate their identity and legitimacy, or having a da?n good reason why they couldn’t.
Such a declaration would make all honest people safer. Too bad it’s not policy.
Re the ACLU.
I used to be anti-ACLU because I thought that they were about destroying religious traditions. Then I found myself in a coalition which included religious pro-life people and the ACLU!
I certainly don’t agree with every position they take (I think that local chapters have a certain level of autonomy, though), but I’ve learned to become less susceptible to propaganda and to stop demonizing people merely because of differences in philosophy as a result of working with people in the ACLU.
As a Christian, I’ve become less apt to jump on the bandwagon when our religious symbols are removed from public places because I now think that the biggest enemies of Christianity exist within the Christian community. I’m specifically talking about those who choose to walk with Caesar rather than with God. (war mongers and the like) Of course, Jesus had this figured out from the beginning. His wrath was directed at the religious Big Dogs of the day–not the petty sinners.
I just remembered an old zine (back in the 1980s) where someone rewrote the caption of a Family Circus strip to show Jeffy shaking his dad awake in bed while shouting, “Wake up Razzle! They’re shooting the dogs!”
Weird.
The more things change….
#3… My ACD will charge… well, he looks like he is charging. What he’s really doing is trying to run outside and get a stick for you to throw.
I’m reminded of a picture I’d seen many years ago of a well-dressed gentleman sitting in a chair at an outdoor cafe, legs casually crossed as he held a drink in one hand and a cigar in the other. It was in Munich, I believe. A study in elegance in repose. Behind him was a small group of soldiers (no doubt “our boys”) goosestepping in the background. How beautiful and orderly the world looked in the spring of ’38.
If any serious and well-grounded person ridicules the idea that America may become a police state in the near future, do not waste another breath discussing the matter with them. America is *already* a police state; a largely “friendly” and benign one at this point, but a police state nonetheless.
Hannah Arendt points out in her seminal work _The Origins of Totalitarianism_ that one of the hallmarks of a burgeoning totalitarian regime is numerous overlapping security and intelligence organizations. Radley does outstanding work here highlighting the ongoing militarization of the police, but we should also note the “policification” of the military; abroad they are used for nation-building, and domestically for “civil emergencies”. Attendant to that is the collusion and cooperation between the two, as well.
Collectivism changes different aspects of its outward appearance such that we differentiate and isolate its various forms with few able to note the underlying structure. Fascism, National Socialism, and Communism seem locked in a distinct, distant past, and associations between those well-known historical forms and our present situation only highlights the differences,and so undermines our ability to call attention to the present destruction of our culture and “constitution”.
Taking a cue from Orwell I’ve labeled our present condition “AmSoc”, and it’s true nature is becoming more and more obvious.
Strap in, my friends. It’s going to be a wild, weird ride.
Step #1-Batter door.
Step #2-Throw frisbee.
Step #3-Arrest suspect.
Step #4-Go home and beat wife.
It’s a damned shame the homeowner didn’t waste every member of the SWAT team. The only thing that is going to stop these attacks is the probability of every member of the entry team being taken away in a body bag when one of these raids is carried out.
It should give law enforcement leadership pause when the most law abiding and formerly unquestioningly supportive among the populace starts hoping to see them die in great number. If those citizens see you as being evil and engaging in evil maybe you should stop and reexamine what you’re doing.
#28 | Cynical In CA | February 5th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
…
Well, there’s my time-worn idea of a national organization of dog owners with the sole focus to reach out to local police departments so as to educate LEOs and dog owners on how to peacefully coexist. What do you think, Jefferson? The major drawback identified so far (by JJ, thank you) is that the costs to the individual members outweight the benefit of collective action.
You might try to get PETA and Ben Roethlisberger on board. PETA is looking to do something with, or to, the NFL since Michael Vick to increase their profile, and Roethlisberger buys bullet proof jackets for police dogs. Also, the Animal Planet people, and anybody that owns a dog. I don’t know how much a bullet proof jacket for a dog costs, but with all the purchases it would have to drive the price down after awhile.
I am no master tactician, but if I know the guy owns a gun, and think he might have stolen another gun, I would probably follow him to work the next morning, watch him go into work, see if it looks like he is strapped, if no, go in talk to the person in charge, get that person to call the guy over and slap the cuffs on him then. If he runs, then you have the guys in the SWAT van chase him. If he doesn’t run, you serve the warrent, and go search his house.
I saw a commercial on Spike TV the other day for a show where they follow D.E.A. agents in New Jersey, and I thought I bet this shows up on The Agitator sometime. Watch Spike for twenty or thirty minutes sometime today, and I guarantee you will see the commercial. It is the perfect accompaniment to all these stories.
I would also like to echo the comment that this series of articles could be a book. Hell, you could have a book for each year, because it will be difficult to find a cut off date.
A dog charging a gaggle of assholes entering HIS territory, and acting like, well, assholes, is doing his job. A little pepper spray would put him on the ground/floor and no harm done.
Even without killing yet another of man’s best friends, this still pisses me off. Not much doubt why the approval rating of cops, in general, is in the same neighborhood as congress.
As far as I know (unless something has changed) it is illegal in Maryland to shoot a dog, unless it’s chasing deer…
I know this is a stretch of an overactive imagination, but aren’t the police subject to the law, just like the rest of us?
Thanks for the feedback, old. It surely is a sign of the times that it appears you are advocating private citizens equipping their dogs with bullet-proof vests! My opinion is that it’s totally unfeasible and undesirable (forgive me if you were being hyperbolic, it’s hard to tell sometimes).
A little disclosure: I am not nor have ever been a dog owner, so I am not particularly inclined to dedicate a significant part of my life to creating the organization I have conceived. I am suspicious of established organizations like PETA — they are institutions and exist to serve themselves first, then their members.
My latest wrinkle is to involve schoolchildren in a kind of Children’s Crusade (with a happier outcome), a reverse DARE program where the kids go to police stations and ask officers all sorts of uncomfortable questions about why police shoot dogs who aren’t hurting anyone and are no threat, why police don’t employ safer means of arresting suspects than breaking down doors of private residences where dogs are likely to be, etc. I am fearful that I would be labeled an exploiter of children, though, and I don’t want the headache.
I still believe police officers are human beings with consciences, and imagining the emotional impact on an officer of a child asking such simple questions, I can’t help but be optimistic that more than a few minds might be changed.
…and to stop demonizing people merely because of differences in philosophy as a result of working with people in the ACLU.
The cases of Cory Maye and Ryan Frederick represented gross violations of civil rights. Do you think the ACLU cares?
[...] isolated incident” som handlar om s.k. no-knock raids som på något vis gått fel. Här är den senaste. Det syftar förstås på att någon gång blir enskilda händelser till ett [...]
#56 | Cynical In CA | February 6th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Thanks for the feedback, old. It surely is a sign of the times that it appears you are advocating private citizens equipping their dogs with bullet-proof vests! My opinion is that it’s totally unfeasible and undesirable (forgive me if you were being hyperbolic, it’s hard to tell sometimes).
I am advocating exactly that. If enough dog owners were walking their dogs, and the dog was wearing a bulletproof vest, with lettering that spelled it out, and enough people asked the dog owner, “Why the vest?” and the dog owner could reply “Did you know police shot x number of dogs last year alone?” Something along those lines. Get the conversation going, then get into no-knock warrents served on wrong houses where the dog was shot, or the right houses, where the dog was shot. I am not saying it would work, but it might get a conversation going at the dog park.
Not sure you’ll read this old, but OK, you sold me on the idea. It’s expensive though. Not sure how many dog owners would splurge. Comes down to how pervasive the threat is, how it is perceived by the public.
The followup unintended consequence of guard dogs (especially, but of course non-guard dogs could wear them too) wearing bulletproof vests would be legislation promoted by police unions outlawing this on the basis that it would threaten officers’ safety in dangerous situations.
Of course, I am all in favor of police being as vulnerable as possible — just outlining where I think this would go given society’s perverse priorities and top-down social order.
#60 | Cynical In CA | February 9th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
Not sure you’ll read this old, but OK, you sold me on the idea.
Holy Christ! Did the internet just work?
LOL. First time for everything.
It occurred to me that you don’t even need to put a real bulletproof vest on your dog. It just needs to look like one to get the conversation started.
[...] man may be on death row, and drug warriors keep knocking down doors. [↩]Radley Balko – Another Isolated Incident (w/ Puppycide) [↩]Stephen Littau – A Tale of Two Drug Raids [↩]nzz – Wenn die Polizei Informationen [...]