I don't know that the GF's statement is enough for a search warrant. Yes, hindsight is 20/20, but I can't fault the police for the decision they made at the time with the information they had AT THAT TIME.
But a search warrant based on what?...that a g/f or ex said so? Unfortunately because ppl. can say anything, that generally wouldn't be nearly enough for a search warrant. I agree it's definitely a shame, but I doubt there waa anything that really could've been done unless the g/f or ex, was able to give them some evidence or something, but it doesn't sound like that was the case.
I mean, what was the probable cause? Some woman who was either in or had been in a relationship said so? Ppl., especially when dealing with relationships say things a lot... they can't just go off someone's word...it would infringe on our rights, that we as Americans are very serious about protecting. Someone could go to the police and tell them you're building bombs in your basement... but without evidence (if even building bombs is a crime ...I'm not sure) they're not just going to be able to come busting through your home searching for them. Right or wrong, it's just not how our system works.
I guess we'll have to agree that we live in different worlds where the laws and implementation of them are different. I've worked in the criminal justice field and mental health and as sad as it is literally ppl.s hands are tied more times than not. Like I said if the g/f came with some evidence etc.; then maybe, depending on the evidence, but just because some joe blow off the street says so, generally doesn't hold any water. Add to that the more info. coming out about when and how the g/f reported it...yeah unfortunately that credibility would never hold up in court. Obviously she was telling the truth and right, but again not how our system works. The only thing that could come from this is more discussion about said system and how to hopefully better it.
You have the importance of the two situations reversed.
The definition of terrorism is violence (or threatened/attempted violence) for a political purpose.
Think you could find an article showing that his race had anything to do with the police response to his girlfriend's allegations?
Hmmm... that's quite a leap and seems to be irrelevant to the case. I don't see any reason to think his race had anything to do with the situation or circumstances.
I'm so confused...when you were talking about his race making it different you were quoting my post about probable cause for a warrant ... all before this happened, so I'm still not seeing where his race would've come into play or made a difference. Are you saying that you think if he wasn't white he would have been labeled a terrorist just off the g/fs statements a year and a half ago...like before this happened? Again, that seems like a huge leap.
I think PP is claiming:
No, not by itself. If there were a political motive for blowing up the ATT building, THAT would be terrorism. But no such motive has emerged.
Nope, not unless it was done by some foreign government...which it was not.
Oh, there are thousands of articles on institutional racism! It's a very popular topic. But unless someone can show some actual connection to this particular incident, "institutional racism" is nothing more than buzzwords in this context.
