SWAT/Police Cause $60,000 Damage to Retiree's Home to Catch a Wanted Perp then Tells Homeowner She Has to Pay For Repairs as Police Have Immunity!

[jcgriff2]

Definitely an American phenomenon - I think.

SWAT attached a BOMB to blow the large garage door off and used an APC to destroy the fence; fired 30+ tear gas grenades into the home through windows and roof; and much more.

Look at that picture. Looks like cops had a fun field day, huh? The home had just been prepped for sale too.

 

[Digerati]

Well it definitely is NOT "exclusively" an American phenomenon. In the UK, for example, there are even government guidelines detailing how "innocent" homeowners can sue the police should they refuse to pay for such damages.

Some US States, including Minnesota and Texas (where this happened), "require compensation for innocent owners when officers damage their property while enforcing the law."

This is certainly a global problem - I suspect even more of a problem where the governments maintain dominating control over the news media outlets - and its citizens.

***

This is a tricky issue. If the police fail to verify an address and hit the wrong house, then the police/city should be held 100% liable.

But if a bad guy breaks into an innocent person's home, and the police inflict "reasonable damage" getting the bad guy out, who's liable? I think the homeowner's insurance should be - not the homeowner, not the police or us taxpayers.

If the legal occupants of the home are the bad guys (or willingly allowed the bad guys in), they should be held liable.

So what is "reasonable damage?" Definitely not "30" tear gas canisters through holes in the roof and 6 windows as well as other damage SWAT did.

I believe the individual police officers performing such raids and searches should have a great deal of (but not total) immunity - but not the police departments (responsible for training) or the on-scene commanders directing the operations.

IMO, since they knew the bad guy let his hostage (his daughter) out and had no additional hostages in the house, they should have just surrounded the house, position a couple of snipers about - just in case - and wait him out. Eventually, he would have got hungry and given up; come to a window, pointed a gun and become a sniper target; or there would have been a telltale stench coming from inside to indicate he was no longer a threat.

We clearly don't have the full story. .......... But it appears the police did not even try to use a police negotiator to talk him out peacefully. I wonder why not?

I believe the individual police officers should have a great deal of (but not total) immunity - but not the police departments.

I hope this lady wins her appeal - if for no other reason than it is a government's primary duty to protect its innocent citizens.

***

On a related issue, I fully understand if there is a need for the "element of surprise". What I don't understand is why some police - AFTER knocking and announcing their presence, and ordering the occupants to "open up" - then use a battering ram (or heavy kick) to breach the door without first checking to see if it is even locked. The element of surprise is already gone. I had thought this was just a TV/movie thing but it's not.

Checking first to see if locked should be SOP. Apparently, it is not - or if it is, it frequently is ignored.

 

[Corday]

In the end, she won: Woman awarded nearly $60K in damages after SWAT team in McKinney destroyed her home.

​

 

[Digerati]

In the end, she won

Not yet. Note that article is from 2022. The city is appealing the decision. That appeal is still pending. She has yet to receive a cent.

Sadly, I bet the city, county and state are still levying property taxes on that unlivable home they destroyed.

 

[Will]

In the UK, for example, there are even government guidelines detailing how "innocent" homeowners can sue the police should they refuse to pay for such damages.

I've never heard of the police in the UK doing much other than forcing entry via a door before. We don't really have the same police SWAT culture - most of the time a couple of police officers will just knock.

Anytime I've seen / heard of bigger raids, they'll force maybe any doorways, but the damage is pretty limited.

 

[jcgriff2]

The 78 year old homeowner appealed in the Federal 5th Circuit Court of Appeals and won on her brilliant attorney's use of eminent domain instead of challenging police sovereign immunity, which has seemingly always been a loser. Next stop may be the us Supreme Court.

Throughout the country, state and federal judges almost always side with the police and other agencies when they cite sovereign and governmental immunity claims for damages to property.

However, Baker and her attorneys used a novel legal approach to sidestep governmental immunity claims and the legal argument resonated with the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Spoiler: The Full Story

On that day, a contractor and handyman that Baker knew had fled inside her home to take refuge after kidnapping a 15-year-old girl. Baker's daughter was startled but escaped the home while an armed Wesley Little remained inside with the teen. Once she left the house, she called 911. McKinney police quickly surrounded the home and negotiated with Little to let the teen go. He complied but wouldn't surrender. SWAT then proceeded to make their way inside.

"The damage to the home was extensive," Baker told WFAA. "They used around 30 tear gas canisters. They used a small bomb on my garage door and blew that off." The canisters were shot through the walls, roof and windows. A SWAT vehicle also mowed over Baker's fence. When police made entry to the home, Little had already committed suicide.

By the time McKinney Police left the area, Baker says more than $50,000 in damage had been done. "I think it was close to $70,000," Baker said. And Baker had to pay out of pocket to get everything fixed. A hazmat crew had to dispose of anything dangerous in the home, and Little's body had to be removed too. Baker told WFAA that nearly every window in the home had to be replaced, as well as the front and garage doors. Baker added that appliances, flooring and fencing also had to be repaired. The lingering smell and residue from tear gas were also an issue. On top of that, Baker mentioned her daughter's dog was trapped inside the home during the raid and that it went blind and deaf due to the tear gas and explosions. As expected, the sale of the property went out the window.

Baker eventually sold the property after making repairs. Baker's insurance did cover some of the damage -- though, only what was done by Little. That included anything connected to his suicide and subsequent cleanup. Baker's insurance, however, didn't cover everything else. "They told me they didn't pay for an act of government," Baker told WFAA.

Baker filed a property damage claim with the City of McKinney but they refused to reimburse her. The city claimed sovereign or governmental immunity and stated that the officers and department were protected from damage claims for simply doing their jobs. Baker turned to the Institute for Justice and began a civil battle in court that resulted in her victory last summer. And the strategy they used is one many property owners wish they knew in their court battles to defeat sovereign or governmental immunity.

'This is just like eminent domain'

WFAA has aired a series of stories on sovereign immunity and the extreme difficulties innocent residents face in Texas to defeat it when a property is damaged or destroyed by a governmental entity. Others, such as patients suffering malpractice in public hospitals, are limited or unable to file lawsuits or gain compensation from governmental entities, WFAA has found. When damage occurs during the scope of an investigation, law enforcement agencies may claim immunity under the old English legal concept of sovereign immunity -- meaning the king could not be sued or prosecuted. Time and time again. state agencies and cities have made sovereign and governmental immunity claims to shield law enforcement and other agencies from financial and legal losses. They also make these claims to make sure a department or agency isn't hamstrung from doing the scope of their responsibilities.

IN 2020, WFAA focused on the police powers used in three unique cases in Texas and Colorado. In the three cases involving two families and a business owner, WFAA found their property was severely damaged or destroyed by law enforcement and received little or no compensation due to immunity claims. So, if law enforcement or other governmental entities damage your property, their liability is limited.

Victims often lawyer up and take their claims to court. But state and federal judges almost always side with agencies or police due to sovereign and governmental immunity claims. In Texas, the state can't be sued successfully without consent from the Legislature. And under Texas law, the Legislature doesn't admit liability by granting permission to sue. Because these protections are in place, a claimant’s shot of winning in court is often low.

Enter Vicki Baker. Her attorney Jeffrey Redfern won because he sidestepped challenging governmental immunity altogether. "The real strategy here was to avoid immunity entirely," Jeffrey Redfern said. "Our whole theory here is that this was a 'taking' under the Takings Clause just like eminent domain." The Takings Clause is pivotal in many cases where eminent domain is used. Redfern and fellow counsel argued that the city had a right to 'take' Baker's home during their raid for public use but that she should be compensated under the Fifth Amendment in the U.S. Constitution. "The courts have said when the government takes your property intentionally for some public use, you get justly compensated," Redfern said. The strategy worked with a jury. Baker's win is the first time a federal court has ruled that the Fifth Amendment requires a governmental entity to pay an innocent property owner whose property was damaged or destroyed by police, per Redfern.

A legal breakthrough

Redfern is hopeful other attorneys see the success of Baker's case and use it as a blueprint to make innocent victims whole. He also thinks this kind of issue involving sovereign and governmental immunity will wind up before the U. S. Supreme Court soon. Baker's case has a real shot if McKinney loses its appeal and asks the U.S. Supreme Court for a ruling.

Her issue is that this long road of legal tape costs money, and it likely would have been less of a headache and cheaper for the city to just pay her when she filed her original claim for damages. "They've got the money because they're fighting me with it," Baker said.

"Why not give that money to individuals that they've harmed?"

Picture below = THE BACKYARD. Police confirmed that explosive charges were used to blow the garage door off.

McKinney Woman Sues City of for PD Destroying Her House, and Wins!! - AR15.COM

Police did tens of thousands of dollars in damage to a McKinney woman's house -- she got them to pay for it all via eminent domain

In another episode where Nearly 40 years ago, the Pennsylvania State Police dropped a sachel of C-4 bombs/explosives from a helicopter onto a reinforced roof bunker located on top of a row home in West Philadelphia. A fire erupted that ended up burning down over 61 homes spread over 2 square city blocks. News reports claim that in excess of 10,000 rounds of ammunition were exchanged between Philadelphia police and MOVE members. This was the second major violent altercation between police and MOVE in ~7 years. The 1978 shootout occurred 2-3 blocks from Drexel University and the University of Pennsylvania.

11 people died that day in 1985, including children.

The city was involved in rebuilding the destroyed homes (1985), but uber-mass corruption saw billions of dollars go "missing".

---