Neal's Workshop - Post details: 92-Year-Old Atlantan Murdered in Police Raid

92-Year-Old Atlantan Murdered in Police Raid

Posted on 11-23-2006 at 10:30:46 am by Justin, 377 words, 1765 views

Radley Balko, the Agitator, is covering the latest present day example of how you and I are living in a police state. The case? Atlanta police had an undercover buyer purchase drugs at the home of a 92-year-old woman who, appparently, rarely ever left her house. Note that the buyer purchased the drugs from a man, and this mystery seller remains at large. From this WSBTV article:

Three Atlanta police officers were shot and wounded and an elderly woman killed at a house in northwest Atlanta Tuesday night.

The woman, who relatives say was 92-years-old, opened fire on the officers from the narcotics division at a house at 933 Neal Street, according to officials. Authorities say they received a tip of drug activity taking place at the home and officers were headed to the house with a search warrant.

Relatives identified the elderly woman as Katherine Johnston.

The woman's niece, Sarah Dozier, says that she bought her aunt a gun to protect herself and that her aunt had a permit for the gun. Relatives believe Johnston was frightened by the officers and opened fire.

"They kicked her door down talking about drugs, there's no drugs in that house. And they realize now, they've got the wrong house," Dozier said. "I'm mad as hell." Officials say they had the correct house and that the warrant they had was legal.

This is inexcusable. Though Balko notes that his primary gripe is with everything up until shots were fired, I disagree. Every aspect of this incident smacks of the growing police state in which we live. That anyone should back down when multiple people, unprovoked and unexpectedly, bust open your door simply because their shirt says "POLICE" is absurd. Drugs? Please. Even if drug dealing was involved, you still are faced with a state that exacts violence on those who engage in consensual acts.

The Johnston case is exactly why "no knock" raids are unconscionable. They encourage violence. It's "Shoot first. Ask questions later." as policy. If you're right, "guilty" individuals, as defined by ridiculous laws, may die. If you're wrong, innocent, private individuals who defend themselves against attacks may die.

There is no justification.

Comments, Pingbacks:

Comment from: js290 [Visitor]

· http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/25/nyc.shooting.ap/index.html

NEW YORK (AP) -- Police fired 50 rounds Saturday at a car of unarmed men leaving a bachelor party at a strip club, killing the groom on his wedding day in a shooting that drew a furious outcry from family members and community leaders.

Permalink 11-25-2006 @ 22:06

Comment from: Idaho_Spud [Visitor]

An oldie but a goodie. I remember quite well when this one happened. They wanted to seize this guy's ranch, but instead ended up shooting him. Nobody ever got in trouble over it either.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=17369

Permalink 11-28-2006 @ 02:50

Comment from: lefty [Visitor]

· http://farleft.blogspot.com

you're absolutely right, neal. at first the police claimed they knocked and announced they were police before entering. then we found out the truth. i wonder why the LIED at first. hmm...

second, who takes time to read a goddamned vest when there are 3 plainclothes peopled knocking your door down?

you're right when you describe this as murder and i don't think it's fair that only the three officers should be punished.

i can't imagine what this woman's family could be going through.

Permalink 11-29-2006 @ 20:43

Comment from: Aaron [Member]

Did you see the AJC's coverage of this today?

They had a piece that consisted entirely of pointing out that the cops responsible had perfect, if not superlative records.

I think the implication was supposed to be that the cops knew best.

Of course, the astute will note that the true implication is that even "good cops" are perpetrating civil liberties abuses, as part of a system that abhors rights, and gives police the universal benefit of the doubt. The problem, in sum, is systemic.

Permalink 12-02-2006 @ 01:52

Comment from: Justin [Member]

Actually, one of the cops responsible has a pretty sketchy record. A la Agitator:

An Atlanta narcotics officer tied to last week's deadly drug raid on a elderly woman's home was the subject of a 2002 lawsuit that said he "fabricated" the events that led to his head-on traffic collision with a motorcyclist.

That rider, Samuel T. Gulley Jr., received a $450,000 payment from the city last year to settle his claims against Officer Arthur B. Tesler, the city and the Atlanta Police Department. The civil case was dismissed from Fulton County State Court after the settlement in September 2005.

That lawsuit alleged Tesler and other unnamed officers "fabricated traffic charges against Plaintiff, ignored evidence ... and improperly initiated criminal proceedings" against Gulley to cover up the fact that Tesler was at fault in the accident that left Gulley with a broken pelvis and broken leg.

Now the credibility of Tesler and other officers involved in last week's killing is being called into question. Tesler was one of two officers who told a judge they directed a confidential informant through the process of an undercover drug buy at the house occupied by Kathryn Johnston, according to court records.

And it looks like they're trying to discredit the informant now - despite having used him innumerous times in the past - despite the informant having every incentive not to come forward on this situation (now cops and criminals alike both know this guys name and likely all have serious reason to exert payback).

Permalink 12-02-2006 @ 10:27

Comment from: David [Visitor]

The police were fired on. They have every right to return fire once they have been fired on. They were also hit and injured, and they could have been killed. The lady did not have any right to open fire on police. If an 18 year old boy had done the same thing, you would have blamed him. But since it's an old lady, you seem to think it's different. it's not. Police have to right to return fire.

Permalink 03-27-2008 @ 23:16

Comment from: Justin [Member]

David,

Its a shame you didn't put your real email address -- signifies you don't *really* want to have a discussion about this important issue.

I wonder, if you lived in an unsafe neighborhood by yourself and legally owned a firearm, what would *you* do if masked men broke your door down unannounced with firearms drawn?

That's the sinister element at play here: law-abiding citizens are supposed to just lay down and literally pray that the people bursting in on them actually *are* police. No knock raids are absurd because they increase the likelihood of the above scenario happening by many multiples.

Beyond that, the cops involved were sloppy in their work. Hard to possibly justify being an apologist for them.

Permalink 03-28-2008 @ 12:00

Comment from: Drug Rehab [Visitor] · http://www.drugrehab.mobi/43/being-a-prisoner-in-your-own-body/

Such events just make me think... How can get the wrong house and shot an old lady... I thought that blind men aren't allowed as police offices, but I may be wrong...

Permalink 06-26-2008 @ 10:24