Police don't have to knock, CNN article

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

No, the Supremes are *interpreting* the law..that being their job. That's how this issue became "law" in the first place; it is in fact based on precedent itself based on a common law principle.

And the fourth amendment to the Constitution which was written specifically to prevent this shit.

There's no written law that actually says police must knock and announce.

See above. It's been in force for over two hundred years and reinforced by the Supremes numerous times between 1917 and 1997, plus state laws in 34 states & DC, so don't tell me it was not the law of the land.

And in the case we're discussing the cops did in fact knock and announce

WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU TO LIMIT THE DISCUSSION TO HUDSON VS MICHIGAN? If they did "knock and announce" why did it get all the way to the Supremes? Somebody along the way, thought not, including the arresting officers:

(Officer)Good testified at an evidentiary hearing that the officers didn’t knock on the front door and waited three to five seconds after announcing themselves as the police before they entered. The prosecutor in the case acknowledged that three to five seconds wasn’t a reasonable warning for Hudson to answer the door, and conceded the officers violated the knock and announce requirement.

I (and I don't think I'm alone) am discussing how the Supremes took away my right to a reasonable chance to put my pants on and open the door before they knock it down.

I'm quite impressed by the ability of folks to project their beliefs onto this with utter disregard for the facts of the case, the law and the decision.

I'm impressed by your attempt to discuss Hudson vs Michigan, change the facts and totally disregard the orders of magnitude more important change in everyones rights.