Ammo For Sale

« « A Holiday Tip for Gun Nuts | Home | Peace, love, and limited government » »

first: whoopsie; now: lies

Despite what the blogs say, the shit has not hit the fan. The Holy Fuck has hit the fan.

Seems the informant the police relied upon to get a warrant to raid the house where they shot a 92 year-old woman was asked to lie by the police. Or so, the informant claims. I mean, you can’t take the word of an informant is what the police will tell us. But they rely on the loose testimony of paid informants regularly.

Radley Balko, who you’ll recall jumped the gun, says:

At risk of sounding like an arrogant bastard, at this point, every assumption I made about this case at the outset has proven correct. And then some.

I don’t think it’s arrogance. It’s that you pay attention. I thought the same thing. There were inconsistencies in the initial press reports, such as one assertion that she shot them through the door but that police knocked and entered. Now, the police are reviewing their no-knock policy, which is odd since they knocked. Or so they say.

There is also scant evidence that the warrant contains a forged Judge’s signature. Double oops. Could be or it could just be the rubber stamp judges use to approve these things.

Regardless, it’s going to be a giant shit storm of inconsistency and ass-covering. I think the one good thing that will come of this whole nasty incident is that people will finally start paying attention to questionable police tactics. That tends to happen when something happens to little old ladies.

Update: Conservative apologists jumped the gun. Heh. Remember, kids, the guy who ends up being right in the end can always accuse the other guy of jumping the gun.

3 Responses to “first: whoopsie; now: lies”

  1. Xrlq Says:

    I donít think itís arrogance. Itís that you pay attention.

    Actually, it’s that Balko’s readers don’t pay attention. At the most general level, Balko made a bunch of vague assumptions that Atlanta cops did a bunch of really bad things – and now that some real facts are out, it’s clear that the cops did indeed do a bunch of really bad things. They’re not the same bad things Radley predicted, however. Radley said wrong house, it turned out to be the right house. Radley said don’t condemn Radley for going off half-cocked, or the investigation will just be a whitewash that never uncovers anything. Boy was he wrong about that! So while it would be fair to say that most of his assumptions turned out to be mostly correct, to claim that all of them were is just plain crap.

    Radley doesn’t care about that, however. Being Radley means never having to say you’re sorry, even when you are clearly, unambiguously and demonstrably wrong. It’s hardly surprising that he won’t admit to the relatively minor goofs when he can get away with an “I told you so” instead.

    Remember, kids, the guy who ends up being right in the end can always accuse the other guy of jumping the gun.

    Anybody can accuse anybody of anything, but the fact of the matter is, Radley prejudged the case and Patterico did not. That Radley’s guesses turned out to be mostly right does not change the fact that he jumped the gun figuratively, any more than a runner who literally jumps the gun can defend himself by pointing out that the guy with the starter gun really did fire it … later.

  2. CTD Says:

    It wasn’t precognition that lead Balko to assume what he did. He didn’t “jump the gun.” He merely saw the same pattern of details he’s seen in hundreds of other botched raids by drug warriors and said that this one stunk to high heaven, as well. And lo and behold, he was right.

    In what universe was the raid done on the “right house,” anyway? Just because it’s the same address as is on the rubber-stamped warrant doesn’t make it “right.” Not when it’s issued on the unverified word of an unreliable junkie/informant at best, or a criminal conspiracy on the part of the cops at worst.

  3. Unix-Jedi Says:

    Radley prejudged the case and Patterico did not.

    Both of them prejudged the case in opposite directions.

    Balko, as it turns out, seems to have been closer to the mark. To some degree, this was “fortunate” (except for the police and Johnson) for Balko’s conclusions.

    But Patterico went at it early, often, and hard at commentators, belying a calm, waiting for decision description. He posted the video of the 72 year old gunman, he accused people of wanting to have cops stand on the porch and be gunned down – this was all while the facts were emerging.

    I’m hoping the current thread where Balko is participating will demonstrate good will between them, and get some detente established.