Patriot's Day Movie

[kpitcher]

Went and saw the movie, about the boston bombing and the manhunt after. It tied together some of the things for me, like why the officer was killed at MIT, etc. I thought it was a good and the ending was a nice tribute to the struggles the victims have went through. However some things made me wonder...

Also, I don't know the accuracy of what was fact and what was added for the movie

- they made a point of saying not to Miranda the bomber's wife. The cops even said "Have you ever heard of that?"

- Some mystery people came in to interrogate the wife. No agency, no titles. When asked who they were no one answered. I took it to be CIA

- They showed cops searching the homes and properties of people in search of the 2nd bomber. It wasn't shown that they actually got permission to do so. Some character said it was awfully close to martial law

I found it interesting that they even put those sorts of questions in the story.

[CPUd]

Went and saw the movie, about the boston bombing and the manhunt after. It tied together some of the things for me, like why the officer was killed at MIT, etc. I thought it was a good and the ending was a nice tribute to the struggles the victims have went through. However some things made me wonder...

Also, I don't know the accuracy of what was fact and what was added for the movie

- they made a point of saying not to Miranda the bomber's wife. The cops even said "Have you ever heard of that?"

- Some mystery people came in to interrogate the wife. No agency, no titles. When asked who they were no one answered. I took it to be CIA

- They showed cops searching the homes and properties of people in search of the 2nd bomber. It wasn't shown that they actually got permission to do so. Some character said it was awfully close to martial law

I found it interesting that they even put those sorts of questions in the story.

Yeah, they were probably CIA. They didn't want her mirandized because they wanted to leave the option open to do rendition and treat her as an enemy combatant.

[eleganz]

Yeah, they were probably CIA. They didn't want her mirandized because they wanted to leave the option open to do rendition and treat her as an enemy combatant.

Didn't watch the movie but even if you're not read the Miranda rights, it doesn't mean you don't have Miranda rights, it just merely means you're not being reminded you have those rights.

[CPUd]

Didn't watch the movie but even if you're not read the Miranda rights, it doesn't mean you don't have Miranda rights, it just merely means you're not being reminded you have those rights.

There is a public safety exception per NY v. Quarles, the reason she was being interrogated was to determine if there were plans to detonate any more bombs.

This is the DOJ policy:
https://www.justice.gov/sites/defaul...-memo-ciot.pdf

There are several reasons they issued this policy, none of them good for the suspect.

"unwarned interrogation" is code for "use torture if necessary"

[Anti Federalist]

Some character said it was awfully close to martial law

Close?

I was there that day.

The city was on lockdown, and this is what you saw in the streets of the search area:



Too early in history yet, but I think it will probably be recorded that freedom and liberty in America ended on the very same date that it was determined to have begun.

In 1775 Bostonians shot at law enforcement doing the exact same thing.

In 2013 they thanked them.

[CPUd]

The shootout in Watertown scene was amped up compared to the real one. Pretty sure the smaller bombs they had weren't powerful enough to blow cars into the air.

[angelatc]

And the kicker is that after all that....after they forced innocent people to leave their homes and then searched the domiciles without warrants, they found nothing. It wasn't until they called the search off and people were allowed back outside did someone locate the bomber hiding in a boat.

[CPUd]

And the kicker is that after all that....after they forced innocent people to leave their homes and then searched the domiciles without warrants, they found nothing. It wasn't until they called the search off and people were allowed back outside did someone locate the bomber hiding in a boat.

In the film they were still searching when the guy went out to check his boat. His wife was trying to make him come back inside, when he saw the hole in the tarp, he looked inside and called. When everyone else showed up, there was a single popping sound, and it took like 2 seconds for them to shoot it full of holes.

[Anti Federalist]

And the kicker is that after all that....after they forced innocent people to leave their homes and then searched the domiciles without warrants, they found nothing. It wasn't until they called the search off and people were allowed back outside did someone locate the bomber hiding in a boat.

Exactly, after all the hut hutting around and lockdowns and bull$#@!, it was a Mundane who happened to spot the guy hiding inside his shrink wrapped boat.

[CPUd]

I was really sad for the guy's boat. Hopefully his insurance bought him a new one.

[Anti Federalist]

I was really sad for the guy's boat. Hopefully his insurance bought him a new one.

During the manhunt for him on the evening of April 19, Tsarnaev was discovered wounded in a boat in a Watertown backyard, less than 1⁄4 mile (400 m) from where he abandoned the SUV. David Henneberry, the owner of the boat, had noticed that the cover on the boat was loose and when the "shelter in place" order was lifted, went outside to investigate. He lifted the tarpaulin, saw a bloodied man, retreated into his house and called 9-1-1. Three Boston police officers responded and were soon joined by other police. Tsarnaev's presence and movement was later verified through a forward looking infrared thermal imaging device in a State Police helicopter. The suspect was observed pushing up at the tarp on the boat and Boston police began a large volume of gunfire at the suspect, stopping only after calls from the Superintendent on the scene. After initial reports of a shootout between police and Tsarnaev, two U.S. officials said on April 24 that Dzhokhar was unarmed when captured.

And they still couldn't hit him to get a "kill".

And were reporting as it as a "firefight" when the only shots fired were by hut hutting cops.

That said, the cops never paid anything, as far as I know, but a donation page was set up that raised it's goal of $50,000 to buy him a new boat.

https://www.tilt.com/campaigns/lets-...bers-standoff/

[phill4paul]

The shootout in Watertown scene was amped up compared to the real one. Pretty sure the smaller bombs they had weren't powerful enough to blow cars into the air.

Yeah, those bombs portrayed were much more powerful than those in real life. Hollywood.

And the kicker is that after all that....after they forced innocent people to leave their homes and then searched the domiciles without warrants, they found nothing. It wasn't until they called the search off and people were allowed back outside did someone locate the bomber hiding in a boat.

Yeah, called bull$#@! when Wahlberg "good" cop was searching houses and there was a guy having a smoke. He asked the guy if anyone was in the house and the guy said "No." So "good" cp told him he better get back inside after his smoke. Didn't bother to check the house. When we know that the houses were searched top to bottom while families waited in their pajamas on the street.

[CPUd]

Were there any instances of police entering homes without probable cause or permission?

[phill4paul]

Were there any instances of police entering homes without probable cause or permission?

Yeah, there were.

[Anti Federalist]

Yeah, called bull$#@! when Wahlberg "good" cop was searching houses and there was a guy having a smoke. He asked the guy if anyone was in the house and the guy said "No." So "good" cp told him he better get back inside after his smoke. Didn't bother to check the house. When we know that the houses were searched top to bottom while families waited in their pajamas on the street.

[Anti Federalist]

Were there any instances of police entering homes without probable cause or permission?

Numerous.

[CPUd]

Numerous.

Did any of them file a complaint (put it in the public record)?

[Anti Federalist]

Did any of them file a complaint (put it in the public record)?

Not that I am aware of...course I haven't looked closely.

[Anti Federalist]

Boston Marathon Terrorist Attacks (April 2013)

https://www.quora.com/During-the-Bos...d-their-way-in

Police and Law Enforcement

During the Boston lockdown if a citizen refused the police entrance into their house would the police have surrounded the house and gotten a search warrant or would they have just thrown the law aside and forced their way in?

The main legal issues are addressed by Orin Kerr here: House-to-House Searches and the Fourth Amendment. He specifically addresses the question of what would happen if the police had entered a home without consent and without a warrant.

The answer is basically as follows:

It's not clear whether an entry and search without consent in this case would have been a violation of 4th Amendment rights, because there (thankfully) haven't been enough or any similar cases in the past to base it on.

However, if it were in fact ruled that the entry violated the 4th Amendment, the most that would happen is that any evidence found couldn't be used against the homeowner. But any evidence could still be used against the suspect, because the suspect wouldn't have standing to suppress the evidence based on a violation of someone else's 4th Amendment rights.

The homeowner could file a civil suit, but even if it were ruled that their rights were violated, qualified immunity would bar recovery because the question of whether the search was allowed hasn't been clearly established.


I don't know what the police would actually have done, but based on this analysis, if they felt they didn't want to wait for a warrant or couldn't get one, they could have entered the house against the homeowner's wishes knowing that either it would be ruled that there were exigent circumstances and it was allowed, or that at worst they wouldn't be able to use any evidence found against the homeowner, which they probably didn't care about, and that they would be protected from any liability.

As Justin Freeman points out, they probably could have gotten a warrant very quickly anyway, assuming a judge was willing to sign a warrant, which I can't speak to, and it sounds unclear whether that would have happened based on Orin Kerr's analysis.

[Anti Federalist]

Did any of them file a complaint (put it in the public record)?

#19 answered your question I think.

ld;dr - It would be pointless to complain, we're the police, move the $#@! along now.

[Anti Federalist]

The Atlantic Wire contacted the ACLU about what went down April 19 in Watertown just hours after the other suspect, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, was killed in a shootout. Executive Director for the ACLU of Massachusetts told the Wire they were interested in hearing from residents about their experience with law enforcement during the search:

Rose said that the organization had received a number of concerned comments from people about the searches that took place, including some from residents of Watertown. None, however, from people whose homes had been searched.

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2013/04...rth-amendment/

[phill4paul]

Not that I am aware of...course I haven't looked closely.

Boston's Door-to-Door Searches Weren't Illegal, Even Though They Looked Bad
Friday's door-to-door sweep of Watertown looked shocking in photos and videos. But according to the ACLU, it was all apparently within the bounds of appropriate behavior.

There were two components to last week's shelter-in-place request in Watertown, Massachusetts. The first was a request that people not to leave home. The second was a door-to-door search by heavily armed law enforcement officials. Those are two very different things, with different implications. But neither was illegal.

Under the Fourth Amendment, homeowners have the right to refuse a request for a search if the police don't have a warrant. But that rule has an exception. If there are exigent circumstances, like the threat of imminent danger, a warrant isn't necessarily needed, but the police must still have probable cause.

It seems unlikely that many residents of Watertown felt like exploring that particular legal nuance by refusing the police entry. Nor is it not clear if any did; a spokesman for the Watertown police department didn't answer a question to that effect.

And, as with Friday's hunt, they were likely perfectly legal.

"Courts look at it differently when there's a threat of public safety than if the police just want to search," the ACLU's Rose pointed out. She noted a situation several years ago in which the Boston police wanted to conduct door-to-door searches seeking out illegal firearms. In that case, the ACLU spoke out against the proposal, and it was dropped.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/...-legal/316042/

Edit: Beat me to it, AF. You're quick on the draw today.

[Anti Federalist]

It seems unlikely that many residents of Watertown felt like exploring that particular legal nuance by refusing the police entry. Nor is it not clear if any did; a spokesman for the Watertown police department didn't answer a question to that effect.

Pretty tough for most modern day jellyfish to assert their rights in front of friends or co-workers, let alone in the face of twenty burly, scowling, hut hutting cops armed with automatic rifles.

[MelissaWV]

I have heard several reports of locals being disgruntled with the portrayal.

“I was living in Watertown when it happened. I was a few blocks away from the shoot out on that Thursday. I first thought it was fireworks. I was in lock down the whole day Friday. A ten-person SWAT team came to my house and searched the small yard in the front and back. And I heard the other shoot out when they found him in the boat. I don't mind movies this soon; what I do mind is who produces and directs it. I think Marky Mark is a poor choice because I feel it will turn into an overly sentimental ‘Boston Strong’ jerk-off festival with empty photo ops of the victims and empty praise for the law enforcement who responded.”

“While we were sheltering in place in Cambridge, we had a friend who lost his leg, and was taken to a different hospital than his child whose bloody screaming face was on the cover of a national news magazine. He was terrified the reason they wouldn't let him see his boy was because his child was dead. I wouldn't watch Marky Mark’s rah rah ‘Murica recreation of an event he wasn't even here for if he brought the DVD to my house himself. $#@! that guy.”

“I was living in Watertown on the street where bomber #2 crashed the car after fleeing the shootout where his brother was shot and killed. The whole thing was just like everyone else has said, surreal and like a movie. A tank drove up my street early Friday morning, maybe 1am. A little later my roommates and I watched a team break into a second floor apartment across the street in search of bomber #2. They cleared the room in seconds! It was amazing to see something like first-hand, although no one really should have to… A re-telling of the events in documentary format isn't in poor taste, but I feel that a dramatization of the events is both in poor taste and unnecessary.”

“I grew up in Watertown and lived in Brighton at the time, inside the lockdown. Old friends who still lived in Watertown posted on Facebook about shootouts outside their houses and bullets going through their walls, and about the FBI and swat teams combing through their houses. It was surreal to see all this go down in a town that — up until that point — was most known among my generation for spectacular hummus. I had a really hard time watching the trailer, and I'm not going to see this. If it helps someone else heal, then that's fine. I know friends from Watertown who are going to see it for that reason. But I don't want to relive that again. I'm a lifelong horror fan, but this is too much. Some horrors should be left off of the screen.”

[Anti Federalist]

"Courts look at it differently when there's a threat of public safety than if the police just want to search,"

And since cutting a loud fart is now considered a "threat to public safety", there is really no legal barrier to do this again in the future.