We are currently listening to the Washington Post’s podcast on no knock warrants. From a law enforcement perspective it does not make for pleasant listening. You can listen here. The podcasts are told from the perspective of the families of those involved. Undoubtedly, there are questions to be answered by law enforcement and the judges involved.
It is often difficult for officers to listen objectively to programming that is critical of law enforcement given the risks that officers face daily in the execution of their duties. However, there is also an obligation on officers to act lawfully and in a way that minimises the risks to the public and to the officers involved. This can be a delegate balance.
No knock warrants are a sensitive topic. The risks to officer safety and the need to preserve evidence need to be balanced against the rights of the citizen. Each no knock warrant needs to be documented in a way that clearly identifies all the risks involved. Unfortunately, officers often lack sufficient training to properly articulate risks in a way that is defendable. No knock warrants should be the exception rather than the rule.
Unfortunately, the cases discussed in these podcasts raise many other issues including the use of informant based intelligence to establish probable cause. Unfortunately many officers have little or no training in informant management and how to manage properly intelligence received from them.
