Education officials break down Stockton man's door

[justbroke]

A SWAT team is a Special Weapons and Tactics team with special training for specific tactics. This particular unit, according to news reports, was specially trained federal agents, about 15 of them. Whether or not they were actually a SWAT team or what they wore is only academic.

I more than know what a SWAT team is, trust me. I have direct experience, and not from the side of the barrel you may think. LOL

In any event, I wasn't misdirecting. It was a generic thing catleg stated about the government is coming for you. I only stated to be careful of your local government as they execute more of these types of warrants on a daily basis than I even care to want to try to explain.

The acts of the feds put the man's dignity and rights on the back burner, for the group as a whole you understand, and only some person in government can determine what is best for the group, right?

I'm not in this discussion about individual rights. I'm sure that many police departments, and even the federal government "agents", get some information wrong. There is a lot more to this story than a "SWAT team" barged down the wrong person's door.

I too don't believe in overkill for simple executions of search warrants. Perhaps they were wrong. However, we always seem to take the alarmist approach and immediately cry, in unison, gestapo, SWAT or paramilitary, when the report only quoted a witness that stated it was "SWAT-like". (I for one, don't know what "SWAT-like" even means.)

I also don't like no-knock warrants. There may be some extremely limited reasons to do so (terrorists, certain drug-related operations on a stash or manufacturing facility, weapons); I don't see the need in this particular case.

I'll stick by my comments which were a.) it wasn't a "SWAT" team, b.) a search warrant authorizes the search of the premises and the specific warrant included detaining the "owners", c.) the DofEd is not coming with any "SWAT-like" team to enforce payment on student loans, and d.) you should worry more about your local government!

[BigJohn]

How many swat officers will they use for an unpaid parking ticket?

[LadyInTheRed]

I for one, don't know what "SWAT-like" even means.

[justbroke]

LITR... I remember that show. They had the evil black rifles and the evil black van as well!

How many swat officers will they use for an unpaid parking ticket?

None. It's s civil infraction.

[mlsj2009]

I more than know what a SWAT team is, trust me. I have direct experience, and not from the side of the barrel you may think. LOL

In any event, I wasn't misdirecting. It was a generic thing catleg stated about the government is coming for you. I only stated to be careful of your local government as they execute more of these types of warrants on a daily basis than I even care to want to try to explain.

I'm not in this discussion about individual rights. I'm sure that many police departments, and even the federal government "agents", get some information wrong. There is a lot more to this story than a "SWAT team" barged down the wrong person's door.

I too don't believe in overkill for simple executions of search warrants. Perhaps they were wrong. However, we always seem to take the alarmist approach and immediately cry, in unison, gestapo, SWAT or paramilitary, when the report only quoted a witness that stated it was "SWAT-like". (I for one, don't know what "SWAT-like" even means.)

I also don't like no-knock warrants. There may be some extremely limited reasons to do so (terrorists, certain drug-related operations on a stash or manufacturing facility, weapons); I don't see the need in this particular case.

I'll stick by my comments which were a.) it wasn't a "SWAT" team, b.) a search warrant authorizes the search of the premises and the specific warrant included detaining the "owners", c.) the DofEd is not coming with any "SWAT-like" team to enforce payment on student loans, and d.) you should worry more about your local government!

Like you Justbroke, (probably law enforcement associated with SWAT- the other side of the barrel) I figure there is more to it than just a civil problem, or at least that is what we all should hope. "I'm not in this discussion about individual rights," you wrote. Well, maybe you should be. I know we have yours and every other law enforcement personnel's solemn promise that we can trust you to do that which is best for all the rest of us, but that is just the point I was making. What law enforcement and the rest of society's authority does should ALWAYS come under scrutiny and be questioned. I think it is what prevents us from having a police state like in the book 1984. Of course I know we are not at all close to that because we all love Jesus, and law enforcement, government, and the military are Jesus' primary tools to save us from ourselves and the rest of the world. I catch, but please forgive me if I am a little skeptical. To further my point, I go along with Catleg when he wrote, "See also the swat massacre of the returned war veteran in Arizona." Another fine example of our police forces (whether local or federal) violating individual rights, for the benefit of the rest of us, of course.

I do agree with you on much of what you wrote too, Justbroke. We certainly should be challenging our local authorities actions as well, but please forgive me, I am not going to be more worried about them. If you don't mind, I will give them equal attention. Whether or not it was a SWAT team is immaterial to me. They certainly came with force, they were well trained, and they appeared like SWAT members to the writer of the story, or the writer got information to such. I wasn't there, don't know the specifics, but since you weren't either, we have only the story to go by. So, your firm faith the DOE is not coming with a SWAT team to collect on a student loan is superfluous. I made no such connection about student loans, and I would hope you are right on that one. We both agree a search warrant might authorize the search of the premises, but I highly doubt the search warrant would include detaining innocent owners. We are innocent until proven guilty still, aren't we? I, for one, don't know the search warrant stated that the TEAM of agents had the authority to detain someone not a part of the investigation without "just cause." Unless you had privy information to this particular search warrant, I doubt you do either.

Violation of the man's civil rights is really what the story was all about to me. The student loan angle was just the element associated with the problem. The feds created more problems by their behavior, and I think worth discussing, even on a bankruptcy forum site. Thanks for your input, Justbroke. I think we can agreeably disagree on some things and agree on others. It is this type of dialogue I think we need to help prevent a police state and the losing of our individual rights.
Have a good one.
MLSJ2009

[justbroke]

Thanks for your input, Justbroke. I think we can agreeably disagree on some things and agree on others. It is this type of dialogue I think we need to help prevent a police state and the losing of our individual rights.

I don't disagree with anything that you have written. I will cry, shout, scream, and protest as loud as anyone else when there are any issues with how much any person or entity in "authority" abuses or appears to abuse such authority. I've read Orwell's 1984 in 1981 and was laughing, to myself, in 1984. However, the theory of Big Brother is not too misplaced; yes, there are people watching what we do.

I think it's worth talking about as well... especially in the Bankruptcy context. I don't want debtors to believe that the Department of Education is going to send a SWAT team to their homes because they've filed bankruptcy... or simply couldn't pay the loans. I will repeat, here on the Forum, that those who engage in fraud, and more particularly Bankruptcy fraud, will find themselves on the wrong side of the U.S. District Court. Not the Bankruptcy side, but the criminal side. All bets are off when your situation becomes criminal.

My real point is and was (and maybe I should have just said it early), I "sometimes" don't like how the media sensationalizes something, then clarifies the story later (downplaying the original story to some extent). It gets us ALL pumped up and angry to hear/read the story. I admit that I was actually upset at first, until I collected myself and tried to collect the facts rather than just see the thread titled "Education officials break down Stockton man's door". Perhaps the news agency would have been better writing a header "Inspector General Executes Search Warrant on Stockton Home", but that doesn't sell newspapers (or get people to watch that channel).

I feel it's a civil duty to make sure that we understand how our governments behave and how they are administering the law. We have recourse, but many of us don't know how to or refuse to re-examine (or even examine) those we vote for. Unfortunately, you may be "innocent" until proven guilty and may be arrested for something that isn't even prosecutable. That won't prevent "them" from arresting you or even executing a search warrant when they have probable cause. I guess I see it as a fine line and how easily that line can be abused.

For what it's worth, I still believe that the "no-knock" style execution of the warrant may have been excessive. We would not be writing about this at all, if the warrant was executed at 9AM with an amiable knock on the front door.

You wonder if they did any surveillance on this house at all to see if she lived there before breaking in the door.

Hey, catleg, I forgot about this post. If you read the warrant, they did do their surveillance and homework. They knew exactly which house, color, size, square footage, occupants, etc. I think you meant militarization of the education system.

[IamOld]

Hello! I think we could though militarization of the police. Do we really need cops who drive tanks? Who dress like they just came back from the "front" somewhere? That's not being a policeman...

I don't disagree with anything that you have written. I will cry, shout, scream, and protest as loud as anyone else when there are any issues with how much any person or entity in "authority" abuses or appears to abuse such authority. I've read Orwell's 1984 in 1981 and was laughing, to myself, in 1984. However, the theory of Big Brother is not too misplaced; yes, there are people watching what we do.

I think it's worth talking about as well... especially in the Bankruptcy context. I don't want debtors to believe that the Department of Education is going to send a SWAT team to their homes because they've filed bankruptcy... or simply couldn't pay the loans. I will repeat, here on the Forum, that those who engage in fraud, and more particularly Bankruptcy fraud, will find themselves on the wrong side of the U.S. District Court. Not the Bankruptcy side, but the criminal side. All bets are off when your situation becomes criminal.

My real point is and was (and maybe I should have just said it early), I "sometimes" don't like how the media sensationalizes something, then clarifies the story later (downplaying the original story to some extent). It gets us ALL pumped up and angry to hear/read the story. I admit that I was actually upset at first, until I collected myself and tried to collect the facts rather than just see the thread titled "Education officials break down Stockton man's door". Perhaps the news agency would have been better writing a header "Inspector General Executes Search Warrant on Stockton Home", but that doesn't sell newspapers (or get people to watch that channel).

I feel it's a civil duty to make sure that we understand how our governments behave and how they are administering the law. We have recourse, but many of us don't know how to or refuse to re-examine (or even examine) those we vote for. Unfortunately, you may be "innocent" until proven guilty and may be arrested for something that isn't even prosecutable. That won't prevent "them" from arresting you or even executing a search warrant when they have probable cause. I guess I see it as a fine line and how easily that line can be abused.

For what it's worth, I still believe that the "no-knock" style execution of the warrant may have been excessive. We would not be writing about this at all, if the warrant was executed at 9AM with an amiable knock on the front door.

Hey, catleg, I forgot about this post. If you read the warrant, they did do their surveillance and homework. They knew exactly which house, color, size, square footage, occupants, etc. I think you meant militarization of the education system.

[catleg]

Well, they took pictures of the house, but it is not true that they listed the occupants of the house, and I'd say they had no idea who lived there. That would explain the massive armed presence.

Maybe DOE has a break-in team, but no qualified surveillance operators. Or they're just lazy.

And no, I did mean militarization of the police. Though in this case there was just one local unit. I was thinking more in terms of non-DOE SWAT operations. All the homeland security grants to local forces to buy robots, armored vehicles, etc.

A little history.
Up until the founding of the FBI 1908 the only federal law enforcement was the Secret Service, Dept of Treasury, which was responsible for all frauds against he US government, primarily counterfeiting. That's how they got the role of protecting the US president. They also got in hot water occasionally by exposing frauds by US congressmen, particularly a case of timber lands in the pacific northwest.

In the Charles Bronson movie Breakheart Pass, he is depicted as being a US Secret Service agent.

[justbroke]

Hello! I think we could though militarization of the police. Do we really need cops who drive tanks? Who dress like they just came back from the "front" somewhere? That's not being a policeman...

I agree on this point specifically. I don't like my local police department having tanks!

Well, they took pictures of the house, but it is not true that they listed the occupants of the house, and I'd say they had no idea who lived there. That would explain the massive armed presence.

That doesn't, actually, make any statement. Federal investigators with law enforcement titles are all "armed". Nowhere in the article or reports where their "weapons" drawn or pointed at anyone. I think we try to read too much into "armed" law enforcement officials entering any residence/place.

Maybe DOE has a break-in team, but no qualified surveillance operators. Or they're just lazy.

Surveillance? In any event, if I were the supervisor of these OIG investigators, I may want to sit them down and ask why the need to break down the door (or perhaps the manager knew).

And no, I did mean militarization of the police. Though in this case there was just one local unit. I was thinking more in terms of non-DOE SWAT operations. All the homeland security grants to local forces to buy robots, armored vehicles, etc.

Yes, I don't like local police having tanks or anything like that, but they do need "some" more armored tools.

A little history.

[catleg]

There is no such thing as "unarmed tyranny".

Anyway, I think in due time we'll find out that this was really a drug bust (or really, a hoping to find drugs bust).

We can always check Pacer and see if this woman's name pops up eventually.

[justbroke]

Anyway, I think in due time we'll find out that this was really a drug bust (or really, a hoping to find drugs bust).

I don't think so. If you read the warrant, the part about contraband was actually CROSSED OUT by the Judge (and initialed by the Judge). That, to me, means that the Judge did not rubber stamp the warrant. I hate to speculate, but you may be right that the education loans may have been used to fund <pick your poison> (e.g. terrorism, drugs, prostitution, smuggling, human smuggling, etc). However, I want to believe that this was pure and simple "over-kill" for what I can only speculate should have been a simple execution of a search warrant upon a subject premises.

We can always check Pacer and see if this woman's name pops up eventually.

You had to bring up PACER! Now you're going to have me searching PACER all day... and I don't mean the Bankruptcy side of PACER.

Unfortunately, I believe that tyranny can exist without weapons. You can keep a particular "class" uneducated and medicated and they may never know that they are being oppressed. Weapons are just a modern day replacement for other tools used in the past.

I apologize, but I haven't connected the DofEd with Tyranny, unless this is actually the beginning of a "war" on education!

(catleg, and your avatar is still scary!)