House To House Random Searches Now Possible Indiana Sheriff Say's 

With the recent Indiana Supreme court ruling giving police unfettered access to people’s homes, Newton County Sheriff Donald Hartman Sr. believes the ruling makes random house to house searches possible.

  INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. – The Indiana Supreme Court has received numerous threats via telephone and email following a controversial decision handed down last Thursday, May 12th, 2011, that “authorizes” police to search homes randomly according to Indiana Supreme Court Spokeswoman, Kathryn Dolan. In a 3-2 ruling in BARNES vs. STATE of INDIANA, Justice Steven David, appointed by Governor Mitch Daniels wrote that under “modern” (post-PATRIOT-Act) jurisprudence, Hoosiers must submit to the violent force of any and all UNLAWFUL searches instigated by law enforcement. The court justifies such intrusion due to individuals having better access to courts, than at the elevation of the right to common-law. In writing for the court, Justice David Steven said that if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner can not do anything to block the officer’s entry.
READ ENTIRE ARTICLE

How can we expect some flunky sheriff
from Indaina to understand the 4TH Amendment  when this moron former director of CIA and NSA  didn't bother to learn  it. 


Sneak And Peek Searches On The Rise

Television news reports aired earlier this week reveal a steep increase by the federal government in the use of   unconstitutional sneak and peek search warrants.A majority of the search warrants were not related to terrorism cases. Justice Department figures indicate the majority of the secretive warrants were issued in drug cases. “While billed as an anti-terror tool, (a sneak-and-peek warrant) had no requirements on it that precluded it from being used in standard criminal investigations,” Peter Simonson of the ACLU stated. The ACLU said it expects so-called delayed-notice warrant numbers to increase so long as the PATRIOT Act remains law. Prior to the PATRIOT Act, the Fourth Amendment protected Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures and requires the government to both obtain a warrant and to give notice to the person whose property is to be searched prior to conducting the search. The notice requirement allowed a property owner to assert his or her rights under the Fourth Amendment. For example, a person with notice might be able to point out irregularities in the warrant, such as the fact that the police are at the wrong address, or that because the warrant is limited to a search for a stolen car, the police have no authority to be looking in dresser drawers, the ACLU points out. The Supreme Court recently ruled that notice is a key Fourth Amendment protection.