worrisome shit

[rone]

So is the decision in US v. Kelly Gould a stomping on the 4th Amendment? It seems to me that the officers behaved correctly in that case, but should that sort of assumption be made by default?

I'm trying to look for more information on this, but it seems very sparse or very partisan.

Comments

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

Yeah, i see what you mean about the comments box. Didn't use to be like that... i'm gonna have to redo my style. Beh.

The article should definitely say "they were told [BY A CERTAIN PERSON] he was asleep. The officers asked [A CERTAIN PERSON] if they could look inside for Gould, and [A CERTAIN PERSON] allowed them to enter." It seems like a crucial detail.

The article seems to be saying that this sets a precedent that allows cops to enter a household whenever they feel that they are being threatened, but i'm not sure that what i read supports that.