Nevada police seize house, arrest homeowners for 'tactical advantage.'

[ReynardMuldrake]

LAS VEGAS (CN) - Henderson police arrested a family for refusing to let officers use their homes as lookouts for a domestic violence investigation of their neighbors, the family claims in court.

Anthony Mitchell and his parents Michael and Linda Mitchell sued the City of Henderson, its Police Chief Jutta Chambers, Officers Garret Poiner, Ronald Feola, Ramona Walls, Angela Walker, and Christopher Worley, and City of North Las Vegas and its Police Chief Joseph Chronister, in Federal Court.

Henderson, pop. 257,000, is a suburb of Las Vegas.

The Mitchell family's claim includes Third Amendment violations, a rare claim in the United States. The Third Amendment prohibits quartering soldiers in citizens' homes in times of peace without the consent of the owner.

"On the morning of July 10th, 2011, officers from the Henderson Police Department responded to a domestic violence call at a neighbor's residence," the Mitchells say in the complaint.

It continues: "At 10:45 a.m. defendant Officer Christopher Worley (HPD) contacted plaintiff Anthony Mitchell via his telephone. Worley told plaintiff that police needed to occupy his home in order to gain a 'tactical advantage' against the occupant of the neighboring house. Anthony Mitchell told the officer that he did not want to become involved and that he did not want police to enter his residence. Although Worley continued to insist that plaintiff should leave his residence, plaintiff clearly explained that he did not intend to leave his home or to allow police to occupy his home. Worley then ended the phone call.

Mitchell claims that defendant officers, including Cawthorn and Worley and Sgt. Michael Waller then "conspired among themselves to force Anthony Mitchell out of his residence and to occupy his home for their own use." (Waller is identified as a defendant in the body of the complaint, but not in the heading of it.)

The complaint continues: "Defendant Officer David Cawthorn outlined the defendants' plan in his official report: 'It was determined to move to 367 Evening Side and attempt to contact Mitchell. If Mitchell answered the door he would be asked to leave. If he refused to leave he would be arrested for Obstructing a Police Officer. If Mitchell refused to answer the door, force entry would be made and Mitchell would be arrested.'"

At a few minutes before noon, at least five defendant officers "arrayed themselves in front of plaintiff Anthony Mitchell's house and prepared to execute their plan," the complaint states.

It continues: "The officers banged forcefully on the door and loudly commanded Anthony Mitchell to open the door to his residence.

"Surprised and perturbed, plaintiff Anthony Mitchell immediately called his mother (plaintiff Linda Mitchell) on the phone, exclaiming to her that the police were beating on his front door.

"Seconds later, officers, including Officer Rockwell, smashed open plaintiff Anthony Mitchell's front door with a metal ram as plaintiff stood in his living room.

"As plaintiff Anthony Mitchell stood in shock, the officers aimed their weapons at Anthony Mitchell and shouted obscenities at him and ordered him to lie down on the floor.

"Fearing for his life, plaintiff Anthony Mitchell dropped his phone and prostrated himself onto the floor of his living room, covering his face and hands.

"Addressing plaintiff as 'asshole', officers, including Officer Snyder, shouted conflicting orders at Anthony Mitchell, commanding him to both shut off his phone, which was on the floor in front of his head, and simultaneously commanding him to 'crawl' toward the officers.

"Confused and terrified, plaintiff Anthony Mitchell remained curled on the floor of his living room, with his hands over his face, and made no movement.
"Although plaintiff Anthony Mitchell was lying motionless on the ground and posed no threat, officers, including Officer David Cawthorn, then fired multiple 'pepperball' rounds at plaintiff as he lay defenseless on the floor of his living room. Anthony Mitchell was struck at least three times by shots fired from close range, injuring him and causing him severe pain."

Officers then arrested him for obstructing a police officer, searched the house and moved furniture without his permission and set up a place in his home for a lookout, Mitchell says in the complaint.

He says they also hurt his pet dog for no reason whatsoever: "Plaintiff Anthony Mitchell's pet, a female dog named 'Sam,' was cowering in the corner when officers smashed through the front door. Although the terrified animal posed no threat to officers, they gratuitously shot it with one or more pepperball rounds. The panicked animal howled in fear and pain and fled from the residence. Sam was subsequently left trapped outside in a fenced alcove without access to water, food, or shelter from the sun for much of the day, while temperatures outside soared to over 100 degrees Fahrenheit."

"Meanwhile, starting at approximately 10:45 a.m., police officers entered the back yard of plaintiffs Michael Mitchell and Linda Mitchell's residence at 362 Eveningside Avenue. The officers asked plaintiff Michael Mitchell if he would be willing to vacate his residence and accompany them to their 'command center' under the guise that the officers wanted Michael Mitchell's assistance in negotiating the surrender of the neighboring suspect at 363 Eveningside Avenue. Plaintiff Michael Mitchell reluctantly agreed to follow the officers from his back yard to the HPD command center, which was approximately one quarter mile away," the complaint states.

"When plaintiff Michael Mitchell arrived at the HPD command center, he was informed that the suspect was 'not taking any calls' and that plaintiff Michael Mitchell would not be permitted to call the suspect neighbor from his own phone. At that time, Mr. Mitchell realized that the request to accompany officers to the HPD command center was a tactic to remove him from his house. He waited approximately ten minutes at the HPD command center and was told he could not return to his home.

"Plaintiff Michael Mitchell then left HPD command center and walked down Mauve Street toward the exit of the neighborhood. After walking for less than five minutes, an HPD car pulled up next to him. He was told that his wife, Linda Mitchell, had 'left the house' and would meet him at the HPD command center. Michael Mitchell then walked back up Mauve Street to the HPD command center. He called his son, James Mitchell, to pick him up at the HPD command center. When plaintiff Michael Mitchell attempted to leave the HPD command center to meet James, he was arrested, handcuffed and placed in the back of a marked police car.

"Officers had no reasonable grounds to detain plaintiff Michael Mitchell, nor probable cause to suspect him of committing any crime.

Police took Anthony and Michael Mitchell to jail and booked them for obstructing an officer. They were jailed for at least nine hours before they bailed out, they say in the complaint. All criminals charged were dismissed with prejudice. They claim the defendants filed the baseless criminal charges "to provide cover for defendants' wrongful actions, to frustrate and impede plaintiffs' ability to seek relief for those actions, and to further intimidate and retaliate against plaintiffs."

None of the officers were ever subjected to official discipline or even inquiry, the complaint states.

https://www.courthousenews.com/2013/07/03/59061.htm

[WhawhaWhat]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

I suppose the fine should be hefty as a deterrent to the police department involved but in no way do you want it to be ridiculous in amount.

We already have a litigation happy society.The fact some asshole cops stepped way over their authority is reflection on them and possibly their boss but its not like this guy was thrown in jail for 5 years.

But if the guy did the same thing to the cop he would go to prison for 30+ years. The police had no authority to detain the citizen in this case and they should be held to a higher standard as someone that represents and enforces the laws in his jurisdiction.

[beach tribe]

Originally Posted by 2bikemike

I don't know maybe its just me but with all the commotion of obtaining entry into the home it seems to me they would have lost all tactical advantage.

I know right.
One might notice a bunch pigs shuffling in and out of the house next door poppin the dog with pepper rounds and comparing the tightness of their shirts
Tazers on the ready, of course.

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by Buzz_TinBalls

well, "the news" has filters, you know

From MSN;



Police allegedly violate Third Amendment just in time for the Fourth


The Third Amendment, which forbids forcefully quartering soldiers in people's homes, doesn't get brought up a lot. Anthony Mitchell of Henderson, Nev., is suing the city for Third Amendment violations. He was arrested for not allowing police officers to use his home as a lookout for an investigation. After Mitchell refused their initial request over the phone, officers allegedly showed up at his door with a metal ram and broke in, "Addressing the plaintiff as 'asshole,'" says the best part of the complaint, "Officers shouted conflicting orders at Mitchell." When he didn't (or couldn't) comply, they allegedly hit him and his dog with pepper spray. The really crazy thing: they also arrested Mitchell's parents, who live on the same street, for the same "crime." Everybody gets a Third Amendment violation! — By Nick Mangione [Source]

http://now.msn.com/anthony-mitchell-...ent-violations


Unfortunately(for main media), this story is gaining legs

MSN != MSNBC

Check the source of this news snippet - it's the same as the OP. Clicking around the links on that site, it looks fairly bogus.

[BigMeatballDave]

Originally Posted by unlurking

At minimum, he deserves the same amount you would have to pay if you shared a dozen songs over the Internet.

I don't share anything.

I steal it, though.

[Garcia Bronco]

I think the thing to do here is imprison the officers for 1 year and seize their homes for 6 months and put their families on the street. Also a public written apology to the families they assaulted. I know it's a tough thing to do, but I see no other way for them to properly learn a lesson.

[Xanathol]

Home owner should have armed himself and thus, opened fire...

[Ace Gunner]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

MSN != MSNBC

Check the source of this news snippet - it's the same as the OP. Clicking around the links on that site, it looks fairly bogus.

bogus? I don't see anything suggesting this at all. in fact, this MSN article brings forth a new detail -- the parents who live on that street were arrested during this op as well, which is why I bolded that. So, is this writer conspiring to make the event up too?

[Chief Roundup]

Originally Posted by A Salt Weapon

Money is not a punishment to government. Sick and tired of hearing about this stuff and there is never any repercussions on the police themselves. The money should come from their personal assets and their pensions. Leaving the tax payers with the bill is another slap in the face.

Yeah see that is the problem. The settlements have to be paid by the taxpayer not the person that committed the act.
Police Officers should have to provide their own liability insurance like Doctors and such or something along those lines. There should be a way to shift the financial responsibility away from the taxpayer.

[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by Xanathol

Home owner should have armed himself and thus, opened fire...

kill a cop? Yeah, brilliant plan.

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by Buzz_TinBalls

bogus? I don't see anything suggesting this at all. in fact, this MSN article brings forth a new detail -- the parents who live on that street were arrested during this op as well, which is why I bolded that. So, is this writer conspiring to make the event up too?

Well since the MSN author lists nothing but the OP's site as his source, I'm still skeptical. So we have some guy, and some other guy. They could be the same writer pimping his own work for all we know.

Due to the internet echo chamber/automated blog pimping for pay-per-click ads, any viral article like this is going to have 100s of hits in a day. But a lot of times when you trace them it's all from one source.

I'm not saying the article isn't true. I'd just like to see another source before I believe it.

[mikey23545]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

Well since the MSN author lists nothing but the OP's site as his source, I'm still skeptical. So we have some guy, and some other guy. They could be the same writer pimping his own work for all we know.

Due to the internet echo chamber/automated blog pimping for pay-per-click ads, any viral article like this is going to have 100s of hits in a day. But a lot of times when you trace them it's all from one source.

I'm not saying the article isn't true. I'd just like to see another source before I believe it.

Yep, this story just does not pass the smell test at all...

[mdstu]

This article links the court document filed on July 1st 2013.
The indecent apparently occurred in July 2011.

http://reason.com/24-7/2013/07/04/ne...vate-homes-arr

http://www.scribd.com/doc/151769636/...t-al-Complaint

Edit: It is however using the same article as it's source.

[Tombstone RJ]

Originally Posted by WhawhaWhat

I stole this from Reddit, but -

There are a lot of claims.

• The constitutional claims
• Assault
• Battery
• False arrest and imprisonment
• Intentional infliction and emotional distress
• Negligent infliction and emotional distress
• Civil conspiracy
• Defamation
• Abuse of process
• Malicious prosecution
• Respondeat superior
• Negligent hiring, retention, supervision, and training

Court Docs -
http://ia601809.us.archive.org/11/it....95379.1.1.pdf
http://ia601809.us.archive.org/11/it....95379.1.0.pdf

I'd sue the shit out of those friggen assholes if they pulled this stunt on me. This is an obvious abuse of power.

[Hammock Parties]

**** cops.

[J Diddy]

Originally Posted by Alex Smith HATER

**** cops.

**** punks.