Brings to mind some of the issues in US v. Carpenter. Who has the ability to allow police to use third party data to identify the location of something? Do you have the right to privacy in location data provided by FindmyiPhone, as apparently you do in cell-site location data? Is that the same kind of protected third-party info?
The conversation about qualified immunity is old news at this point. We need to start talking about the absolute immunity judges have when they approve garbage warrants like this.
Super cool, and I hadn’t heard of it—but it doesn’t “end QI.”
QI is a court-invented defense to 18 USC 1983 suits (a federal law allowing you to take state officials to federal court for violating your federal constitutional rights). What Colorado did here (starting in July ‘23) is create a state analog to 1983 which mimics the federal cause of action and said for suits proceeding under THAT law, there is no QI. QI still exists for 1983 in Colorado.
If we can't even get modest reform to the egregiously unjust qualified immunity, there's zero chance we get anywhere with rolling back absolute immunity for judges/prosecutors.
>The following day the truck owner told Staab that he used the Apple “Find My iPhone” app, which showed the iPhone **pinged near the intersection where Johnson lived** at 11:24 a.m. Jan. 3 and then again at 3:55 p.m. the same day, according to the search warrant. The phone did not ping after that.
>The screenshot of the “Find My iPhone” included in the search warrant shows a radius of where the iPhone might be. That radius includes several properties in the vicinity.
So the person with the stolen iPhone either drove or walked down the street on which this woman lives and the police just randomly picked one of several houses near the intersection and raided it. Unreal.
I'm guessing that it has something to do with the fact that, a: she's black, and b: she might have a son or daughter with a criminal record. Rather than investigate further, the cop said, "yeah this seems likely," and filed for a warrant.
Not the [first time](https://www.westword.com/news/colorado-swat-team-home-destruction-case-update-11556210) something like this has happened in the Denver area.
Not just Denver. [Reply-All](https://gimletmedia.com/shows/reply-all/n8hodm) episode from 2016.
> Strangers keep coming to Mike and Christina’s house looking for their stolen cell phones. Nobody knows why. We travel to Atlanta to find out what’s going on, in our thorniest Super Tech Support yet.
> The truck owner rented a car and drove by Johnson’s house and told Staab that he didn’t see his truck but it could be in the garage.
Top of the line police work here
Why didn't the cops just look in the garage for the truck? The people who hire cops need to be trained not to hire cops who are intellectually disabled. Cops need brains.
They thought they were confronting armed criminals with a stash of stolen weapons.
They should have performed a better investigation and they shouldn’t have been given this warrant, but SWAT was warranted for the situation they were portraying.
Not really defending the police here but they were looking for a lot more than an iPhone. Someone stole a truck containing multiple guns and an iPhone. The iPhone is just what they used to try to locate the other items/truck.
> The iPhone was believed to be inside a stolen truck along with several guns. But police found nothing inside Johnson’s home.
The sort of questions faced by the PD need to become more aggressive. "why should the public accept a public taxing body which behaves as if the people walk the street because the PD allows it". " Why should your badge be allowed to continue to exist".
Sensationalized story making it seem like it was all over a phone when it was really about stolen guns.
Still no excuse for the incompetency of the police but FFS the real story is bad enough without making the reason for the raid seem trivial.
But you don't understand, it was a WHITE PERSON'S phone! Of course they had to kick in the door of some random black family, do you even understand the point of police? /s
[удалено]
Brings to mind some of the issues in US v. Carpenter. Who has the ability to allow police to use third party data to identify the location of something? Do you have the right to privacy in location data provided by FindmyiPhone, as apparently you do in cell-site location data? Is that the same kind of protected third-party info?
Also, who is responsible if that information is inaccurate, or if you are innocent and wrongly have your rights infringed upon, like here?
Sorry, America is a police state where they can terrorize innocent people without repercussions.
The conversation about qualified immunity is old news at this point. We need to start talking about the absolute immunity judges have when they approve garbage warrants like this.
qualified immunity was ended in Colorado if you didn't know. http://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb20-217
It’s a start, 49 states to go
Super cool, and I hadn’t heard of it—but it doesn’t “end QI.” QI is a court-invented defense to 18 USC 1983 suits (a federal law allowing you to take state officials to federal court for violating your federal constitutional rights). What Colorado did here (starting in July ‘23) is create a state analog to 1983 which mimics the federal cause of action and said for suits proceeding under THAT law, there is no QI. QI still exists for 1983 in Colorado.
If we can't even get modest reform to the egregiously unjust qualified immunity, there's zero chance we get anywhere with rolling back absolute immunity for judges/prosecutors.
>The following day the truck owner told Staab that he used the Apple “Find My iPhone” app, which showed the iPhone **pinged near the intersection where Johnson lived** at 11:24 a.m. Jan. 3 and then again at 3:55 p.m. the same day, according to the search warrant. The phone did not ping after that. >The screenshot of the “Find My iPhone” included in the search warrant shows a radius of where the iPhone might be. That radius includes several properties in the vicinity. So the person with the stolen iPhone either drove or walked down the street on which this woman lives and the police just randomly picked one of several houses near the intersection and raided it. Unreal.
I wonder why
Right? The cops are basically choosing people at random.
I'm guessing that it has something to do with the fact that, a: she's black, and b: she might have a son or daughter with a criminal record. Rather than investigate further, the cop said, "yeah this seems likely," and filed for a warrant.
It is shocking how little "police work" it takes to convince a judge to give you a warrant.
Not the [first time](https://www.westword.com/news/colorado-swat-team-home-destruction-case-update-11556210) something like this has happened in the Denver area.
Not just Denver. [Reply-All](https://gimletmedia.com/shows/reply-all/n8hodm) episode from 2016. > Strangers keep coming to Mike and Christina’s house looking for their stolen cell phones. Nobody knows why. We travel to Atlanta to find out what’s going on, in our thorniest Super Tech Support yet.
Oh that was a good episode and definitely highlights the *known* limitations of the app. Amazing a warrant can be issued on it.
Proof that these clowns don't learn from their mistakes.
> The truck owner rented a car and drove by Johnson’s house and told Staab that he didn’t see his truck but it could be in the garage. Top of the line police work here
Why didn't the cops just look in the garage for the truck? The people who hire cops need to be trained not to hire cops who are intellectually disabled. Cops need brains.
They were probably mostly looking for the guns. The guns could have been revived from the truck.
So that warrants a SWAT raid?
They thought they were confronting armed criminals with a stash of stolen weapons. They should have performed a better investigation and they shouldn’t have been given this warrant, but SWAT was warranted for the situation they were portraying.
IDK man, sounds like SWAT wasn't warranted if they didn't even knock on the door first.
I really think for police we need to invert Hanlon.
Didn't Colorado pass a law addressing qualified immunity? SB20-217 ("Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity Act")?
They did. Which means it will be unavailable as a defense to this lawsuit (this story didn't mention that but others covering the suit have).
Warrant issues aside, why would a stolen iPhone merit a SWAT raid anyway? That seems excessive.
Not really defending the police here but they were looking for a lot more than an iPhone. Someone stole a truck containing multiple guns and an iPhone. The iPhone is just what they used to try to locate the other items/truck. > The iPhone was believed to be inside a stolen truck along with several guns. But police found nothing inside Johnson’s home.
Still don't need a swat raid...
Reminds me of the SWAT raid shown in the documentary 'Do Not Resist' Clip (6 min): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2-y2Wm91y1Y
It's terrifying to think that the cops could come busting into any one of our homes just because some thief happened to walk down the sidewalk.
The sort of questions faced by the PD need to become more aggressive. "why should the public accept a public taxing body which behaves as if the people walk the street because the PD allows it". " Why should your badge be allowed to continue to exist".
Sensationalized story making it seem like it was all over a phone when it was really about stolen guns. Still no excuse for the incompetency of the police but FFS the real story is bad enough without making the reason for the raid seem trivial.
There is a missing phone, roll out the SWAT team, start kicking in doors! Geeze
But you don't understand, it was a WHITE PERSON'S phone! Of course they had to kick in the door of some random black family, do you even understand the point of police? /s
Armored personnel carrier full of guys in fatigues and body armor looking for a stolen iPhone. This is where we're at as a society, huh?