Home Blog Page 6051

7th Circuit Blasts Evansville Flash Bang Search, Notes Racial Factor

0

Dave Stafford for wwwtheindianalawyer.com

Evansville police “committed too many mistakes to pass the test of reasonableness” in a bungled home search and are not shielded from a federal excessive force lawsuit, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday.

An armored phalanx of SWAT officers raided the home that 68-year-old Louise Milan shared with her two daughters. Officers investigating anonymous online threats against police began their search by smashing a window and the glass storm door – the front door was open – then lobbing flash bang grenades inside.

The 7th Circuit also noted a racial element in allowing Milan’s suit against the Evansville Police Department to move forward. Judges called events related to the bungled raid “almost inconceivable,” “dangerous” and “disturbing.”

The opinion affirmed denial of summary judgment for the police department on Milan’s excessive force claim, upholding a ruling by Judge William T. Lawrence  of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division.

Milan’s home was searched a day after authorities became aware of threats made against police through an unsecured Wi-Fi network in Milan’s home.

The heavily armed 11-member SWAT team, followed by a local TV news crew, descended on Louise Milan’s home with a search warrant in June 2012. “Police decided to search the Milan house – and in a violent manner,” Judge Richard Posner wrote for the panel in a scathing eight-page opinion in Louise Milan v. Billy Bolin, in his individual capacity as Evansville Police Department Chief, et al.,  15-1207.

“The members of the SWAT team rushed to the front door of the house, knocked, and without allowing a reasonable time — more than a few seconds — for a response … broke open the front door and a nearby window, and through these openings hurled two ‘flash bang’ grenades. … The police call them ‘distraction devices,’ an absurd euphemism; we called them ‘bombs’ in Estate of Escobedo v. Bender, 600 F.3d 770, 784–85 (7th Cir. 2010), and United States v. Jones, 214 F.3d 836, 837–38 (7th Cir. 2000)

Before the search of Milan’s home, which yielded no sign of criminal activity or male suspects, police had observed Derrick Murray sitting on a porch a few doors down. Murray previously had been convicted of intimidation for threatening police, and he ultimately pleaded guilty to posting the threats in the instant case.

After police searched Milan’s home, “It took them only a day to discover that it was indeed (Murray),” Posner wrote. “The police neglect of Murray is almost incomprehensible. His past made him a prime suspect. A day of investigating him would have nailed him, as we know because a day of investigating — the day after the violent search of the home — did nail him. …

“It took them only a day to discover that it was indeed he who was responsible — he had used Mrs. Milan’s open network to threaten the police. But rather than give him the SWAT-team treatment, the police politely requested that he come to police headquarters, which he did, where he was arrested without incident. … The police department’s kid-gloves treatment of Murray is in startling contrast to their flash-bang assault on Mrs. Milan’s home,” the panel noted.

“The district judge’s denial of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment appears eminently reasonable when one puts together the flash bangs, the skimpy basis for the search and its prematurity — the failure to check whether the (WiFi) network was open and the failure to conduct a more extensive investigation before deciding that flash bangs were appropriate means of initiating the search. … The failure to discover that the network was Mrs. Milan’s was a failure of responsible police practice,” Posner wrote.

During the course of the search, police handcuffed Milan and her 18-year-old daughter; Milan’s other daughter was not home at the time of the search. All of this was recorded on officers’ helmet-cam video, and scenes from the search were shown on local TV news. The panel was troubled by the images.

“The members of the team are seen on the tapes impressively clad in body armor and big helmets and carrying formidable rifles pointed forward. It would take a brave criminal to try to fight it out with them, and of course there was no criminal in the house and little reason to expect one to be there,” Posner wrote.

“The handcuffing of the daughter, looking indeed much younger than her 18 years, is shown on the helmet video along with the rest of the search, and she is so small, frail, utterly harmless looking, and completely unresisting that the sight of her being led away in handcuffs is disturbing. All that the SWAT officer had to do was take her by the hand and lead her out of the house, which was rapidly filling with smoke from the flash bangs; there was no conceivable reason to handcuff her.

“From what we can observe on the videos, all the members of the SWAT team were white, Mrs. Milan and her daughter black; the broadcasting of the videotape cannot have helped race relations in Evansville,” Posner wrote.

The panel also cited its previous Estate of Escobedo decision that cautioned against the use of flash bang devices, which can be lethal if a person is directly struck by one. In this case, the police defendants’ argument that they are shielded by qualified immunity falls short, the panel held.

“Precipitate use of flash bangs to launch a search has troubled us before, leading us to declare that ‘the use of a flash bang grenade is reasonable only when there is a dangerous suspect and a dangerous entry point for the police, when the police have checked to see if innocent individuals are around before deploying the device, when the police have visually inspected the area where the device will be used and when the police carry a fire extinguisher,’” Posner wrote.

“The police in this case flunked the test just quoted. True, they’d brought a fire extinguisher with them — but, as if in tribute to Mack Sennett’s Keystone Kops, they left it in their armored SWAT vehicle.”

Lets’ Fix That by George Lumley

9

Where Did The $ Go by George Lumley

Money appropriated for demolitions is not going toward demolitions based on information provided by the City/County building commissioner Ron Bean and City Controller Russell Lloyd.  Where did the money go,  why is it so hard to find out, and can we believe what we are told?

A lack of information almost prevented me from writing this article.  I still have a lack of information; however, the search and request for information is very slow and because time is of the essence, with the city budget season here, I will present this now, and just plan to add to it around Christmas if I get additionally requested information from the City by then.  I may be waiting until hell freezes over.  Yes I know, if I was just nicer and more willing to collaborate with them (join them) they would be more cooperative.  For me collaborate is too much like coagulate.  Plans with good ideas that could flow get collaborated with everyone or compromised down to the same ole same ole going nowhere coagulation.

The City’s coagulated demolition history is hard to understand.  For last year’s 2014 budget the city’s nine member Council appropriated money for demolitions but the Building Commission did not spend it.  Well it appears not on demolitions anyway.

First let’s look at the money not being spent.  The 2014 yearend financial statement shows that $786,000 was budgeted for “demolition”.  That should take out a lot of houses.  At about $5,000 each you would think close to 150 houses.   But surprisingly the City did not spend all of the money set aside.  According to the same yearend financial statement the city only spent $550,000 on demolition.  So the city did not spend $236,000 that they could have and said they would. This is actually the Building Commissioner not spending the allocation the Council says that he can or is recommending that he does spend.  That sounds good you say, he is saving us money.  Well if you like Evansville having more than 2000 blighted houses that are rotting and promoting neighborhood decay you might like saving that money.  But if you are like most residents or If you happen to live next to one of these zombie houses like the burnt out shell at 2831 Egmont (burned in December 2012) you might be upset knowing that a nine member council authorized funding that could have taken out that house but one Building Commissioner just didn’t care enough to spend the money. The $236,000 not spent could have taken out 40 more houses last year and that forty a year missed each year is one reason why we have such a big problem today.

Now let’s look a little closer at the demolitions we did get.  Exactly what did we get for our actual $550,000 spent?   A formal request for a listing of all the demolitions and cost for 2014 and the first six months of 2015, several weeks back, resulted in the Building Commission providing such.  According to the official information provided for 2014: 62 homes were taken out at a cost of $346,000.  That’s a little more per home than my $5’000 estimate, but I see some were over $10,000 with one costing 14,750.  But wait a minute, those 62 properties only total $346,000.  We budgeted for $786,000.

What went wrong with the program for 2014?  It does not look good that we the public were promised $786,000 in demolition but ended up with less than half of that.  Maybe the rumor that the city is out of cash is true.  Maybe the Building Inspectors did not see more than 62 houses that needed demolished.  Maybe this program is just being overlooked by the current administration because Hotels are much more exciting than abandoned houses.

How about that 2014 money that was spent from this appropriation (riverboat demolitions) but did not go for demolition.  I am sure it did not just disappear; however, something is wrong with this picture where $786,000 was budgeted for demolition, $550,000 was spent for demolition, but the demolitions only cost $346,000.  What happened to $216,000 ($550,000 spent – $346,000 actual cost)?  Did this go for operating expenses that are supposed to be under another appropriation for such or maybe this is where the $120,000 that the DMD director claimed was spent on mowing the 120 land banked Brownfields Corp properties is buried.  I had hoped to tell you where this went but after waiting for an answer and even a formal request for the records, all that I have from the city is a couple of written response letters that state they may have records responsive to my request and they will look for them.

Maybe 2015 is going better.  I visited the Controller’s office and spoke with the Controller Russell Lloyd about the 2015 expenditures from the Demolition fund.  Even though we were into the 3rd week of the seventh month Mr. Lloyd said he couldn’t provide the first six month expenditure amount.  He was very nice and personable indicating that the books were not closed out but he planned to do that Monday.  I wondered in my mind why cash basis books would need to be close out to tell me how much had been spent but I left with the understanding that he was closing the books on Monday and I could return for the information on Tuesday.   Well on Tuesday I returned and was informed at the front desk that there were a lot of official requests ahead of mine and it would take some time to process them.  More than a week later all that I have is one of those letters that says they may have information and they will look for it.

What do we know about the 2015 demolition account?  The nine member City Council funded demolitions in the budget at $500,000.  The Building Commissioner (officially) shows 24 demolitions to date at a cost of $148,000.  Ok that’s $500,000 with 30% spent for half the year leaving 70% or $352,000 for the rest of the year.  But wait, with all the news about demolitions the City clearly stated that they had to “come up with funds” for the highly publicized W Maryland demolition.  If they don’t have those funds available for demolitions, what happened to them?  What did they spend the $352,000 ($500,000 – $148,000 spent) earmarked for demolition on?

The city is going to announce a new plan for demolition with a huge requested appropriation for the Evansville Brownfields Corp (Brownfields) to become a Land Bank.  This is the Brownfields that already has City Department of Metropolitan Development (DMD) in trouble with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) people for land banking properties with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds.  DMD says we are currently “in compliance” according to HUD.  How can this be when the Brownfields did not dispose of the properties per the agreement between DMD and HUD.  How were those funds spent and where do we stand? This sounds like another chapter in the same old book.  We don’t need more chapters in the same book titled  “Brownfields Corp Secret Deals”.  Please ask you officials to start a new book on blight.  Let’s look at the real numbers in public.  What are we spending on demolitions, what are we spending on maintaining land banked properties owned by the cities Brownfield Corp, why combine the demolitions, land banking, and tax sale into one secret behind closed doors Brownfields Corp, why did the cities stimulus grant only accomplish half of the forecast, what are the other initiatives to fight blight that need consideration and funding?  Ask for and insist on transparency and control while we work on improving the blight situation.

by George Lumley

Please take time and vote in today’s “Readers Poll”. Don’t miss reading today’s Feature articles because they are always an interesting read. New addition to the CCO is the Cause of Death reports generated by the Vanderburgh County Health Department.
Copyright 2015 City County Observer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Pets of the Week

0

Though Felicia be but little, she is fierce! This tiny female Scottish terrier/Jack Russell mix is very energetic, and cannot go home with kids (or grandkids!) under 12. She needs a dog-experienced household where she can learn to be beta, not alpha. Her $120 adoption fee includes her spay, microchip, vaccines, & more! Visit www.vhslifesaver.org or call (812) 426-2563 for adoption information!

IS IT TRUE AUGUST 4 2015

22
IS IT TRUE this is an extremely complicated transaction concerning the purchases by DMD/ERC,  of properties and buildings on North Main Street?  …take your time and read this post very carefully?  …once you finish reading it,  you should get an idea of the lack proper business planning that went into spending about  $907,200.00  of your hard earned tax dollars?
IS IT TRUE  the DMD/ERC paid $246,750.00 for the former Integra Bank property located  401/415 North Main?  …DMD/ERC’S original plans were to tear down the building and trade it to the owners of the Subway for the Knotty Pine lot on 506 North Main that DMD/ERC paid $19,950.00 for?  …the plan was,  once the old Knotty Pine building was purchased and torn down,  Subway owners would buy the Knotty Pine site?  …plans for Subway to  build at the Integra Bank site fell  apart?  … today’s plans are to relocate  Subway to the Knotty Pine site?
IS IT TRUE  now DMD/ERC are  not planning to tear down the Integra Bank building,  but  want to  put Echo Housing business offices in that building?  …DMD/ERC  are allowing customers of Turoni’s to continue to park at the old Integra Bank Building on a first-come first-serve basis?
IS IT TRUE the end result in this complicated  transaction is that there will not be a public parking lot at the Knotty Pine site with Subway relocating there and Echo and Turoni’s will be using the Integra Bank parking lot?  …it looks like there will probably not be much more new parking  space for adjoining businesses as a result of the $266,700.00 worth of building and land purchases by the DMD/ERC?
IS IT TRUE DMD/ERC  paid $561,750.00 for the vacant CVS  building located at 800 North Main? …DMD/ERC plans were to use this location as a Community Center with Echo Housing having its business offices in part of the building?   …DMD/ERC officials are now saying  they bought this building to tear it down?   …it would be foolish to pay that kind of money for a vacant and dilapidated  building in a questionable part of town,  just to tear it down,  creating a parking lot for 22 cars ?
 IS IT TRUE the DMD/ERC’S new  strategy is for the CVS building is to tear it down for parking?  …if DMD/ERC gets 22 parking spaces from this site the taxpayers shall be paying  $25,534 per space.?
IS IT TRUE the other lots listed in this DMD/ERC  building and land acquisition summary are two (2) parking lots  located at 600/604 North Main that  DMD/ERC paid $15,750.00 for?  …this property was owned by Apostolic World Church?  … the Apostolic World Church building is presently is listed for sale and don’t be surprised to hear that DMD/ERC has  made them an offer to purchase their  building at an inflated  price?
IS IT TRUE that DMD/ERC paid $63,000.00 for the lot behind Gelhausen Paint,  located at 14 West Iowa and   …DMD/ERC agreed to give them  back the property in exchange for letting the public park there during the week?
IS IT TRUE that the DMD/ERC’S total for the original North Main plan was $907,200.00?  …that would have provided about 114 parking spots?
Please take time and vote in today’s “Readers Poll”. Don’t miss reading today’s Feature articles because they are always an interesting read. New addition to the CCO is the Cause of Death reports generated by the Vanderburgh County Health Department.Copyright 2015 City County Observer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Breaking News : City Councilman John Friend Is Asking For Resignation of Chief Bolin

22

As a member and leadership of City Council, I have reached the conclusion that Chief Bolin’s actions or lack of proper investigatory procedures has dealt serious consequences to the taxpayers’ of our community.  Not only the tort claim issue and legal expense associated with the court action but a more hideous aspect, now the world knows that our City must totally disregard the civil rights of individuals, their inherit rights under the 4th amendment and knowing that one can’t live peacefully in their homes without the treat of undo and irresponsible actions of their police department, especially the elderly . . my Lord, Ms Milan is an elderly lady and the child was of tender years . .the two sectors of our society that depends on law enforcement to provide and defend their rights and safety, but as the Seventh Circuit clearly demonstrated in their review, our EPD failed miserably.  I have reviewed the video tape not only the immediate action of our EPD but the preamble to the event which confounds understanding . . the moments just prior to the invasion, the participates appear to be in a festive mood which is concerning and troubling.  Why are they festive? Well, the culture of festivity must  lay on the threshold of our leadership which is Chief Bolin and ultimately our Mayor.

Consequently, in order to restore faith and confidence in our police department and support the rank and file, Chief Bolin must step down immediately and if our Mayor refuses to ask for his resignation, this is paramount of condoning the lack of leadership of Chief Bolin . . .this is regrettable but necessary to restore the confidence that our EPF once processed.

John E. Friend
VP of the Common Council of Evansville, IN

Breaking News :City Councilwoman Brinkerhoff-Riley Call for Chief Bolin to Resign 

14

 

City Councilwoman for Evansville’s Third Ward, Stephanie Brinkerhoff-Riley, called today for Chief Bolin to resign his position as the Chief of the Evansville Police Department.

In making the call, Brinkerhoff-Riley stated, “The 7th Circuit decision that the EPD’s mistakes during the Milan raid were not reasonable and don’t warrant immunity should be the final leadership mistake made by Chief Bolin. A SWAT team is potentially lethal to those they encounter. We cannot afford the potential for another raid that is not warranted. While Chief Bolin is a likeable guy, he is not qualified as an administrator. The closing or planned closings of police stations, pulling patrol officers off of assigned geographic areas to unfamiliar territory for runs, refusing to have a consistent policy on the release of body camera footage, and internal inconsistencies that have led to the low morale of officers are some of the mistakes made. The police department deserves better leadership.”

Vanderburgh County Recent Booking Records

0
SPONSORED BY DEFENSE ATTORNEY IVAN ARNAEZ. 
DON’T GO TO COURT ALONE. CALL IVAN ARNAEZ @ 812-424-6671.

Ed Activity Report

0
SPONSORED BY DEFENSE ATTORNEY IVAN ARNAEZ. 
DON’T GO TO COURT ALONE. CALL IVAN ARNAEZ @ 812-424-6671.

Troopers Investigate Fatal Crash on SR 69

0
SPONSORED BY DEFENSE ATTORNEY IVAN ARNAEZ. 
DON’T GO TO COURT ALONE. CALL IVAN ARNAEZ @ 812-424-6671.

 Indiana State Police investigated a crash last night on SR 69 near Church Street that claimed the life of a New Harmony woman.

 

Preliminary investigation revealed Anthony Skelton, 61, of Evansville, was driving his 2009 Chevrolet northbound on SR 69 south of Church Street when he drove left of center and collided into a vehicle traveling southbound.  The driver of the vehicle traveling south was pronounced dead at the scene by the Posey County Coroner.  Skelton was airlifted to Deaconess Hospital for serious injuries. Both vehicles were totaled.

 

The identity of the New Harmony woman will be released after her family has been notified.

 

The investigation is continuing.

CHINAS STOCK MARKETS

0