tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1349436927283734572.post2966584294217104176..comments2023-10-31T06:39:43.174-07:00Comments on Early Light: Hitpiece Interview Targets Newton Co, IN, Sheriff HartmanEarly Lighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02809034506804521618noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1349436927283734572.post-53888193901120027452012-06-04T08:07:26.102-07:002012-06-04T08:07:26.102-07:00Thomas, please take your spam elsewhere.Thomas, please take your spam elsewhere.Early Lighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02809034506804521618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1349436927283734572.post-76356099128653125242012-05-25T00:52:54.131-07:002012-05-25T00:52:54.131-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04079707123753232925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1349436927283734572.post-85537035549878248042011-05-22T16:49:58.436-07:002011-05-22T16:49:58.436-07:00Gone Fishing in Indiana<a href="http://bytheearlylight.blogspot.com/2011/05/gone-fishing-in-indiana.html" rel="nofollow">Gone Fishing in Indiana</a>Early Lighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02809034506804521618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1349436927283734572.post-65487881758915559562011-05-22T11:57:01.602-07:002011-05-22T11:57:01.602-07:00Beating and arresting citizens for video recording...Beating and arresting citizens for video recording is now also a standard in police work, but this doesn't render such actions lawful. Neither does standardization render unconstitutional usurpation of probable cause and subsequent entry by cops as constitutional or acceptable.<br /><br />I respect your desire to not debate the issue of probable cause, but it's a perplexing desire as probable cause is at the very heart of the recent Indiana Supreme Court issue. Sheriff Hartman is savvy enough to know this. Which is why his very carefully crafted piece of deception specifically mentioned it. Cops in the modern police state use the mantra of probable cause to conduct searches, seize property and make arrests anytime they wish and create the excuse later. <br /><br />There's only one clear understanding of the fourth amendment. The discretion of probable cause is forbidden to anyone but judges and grand juries. No warrant = no search, seizure, or arrest. If the 4th amendment wasn't clearly written to be easily understood by everyone, it would be legally void for vagueness.<br /><br />Sheriff Hartman swore an oath to obey and defend the constitution come h*ll or high water. Standardization be d*mned. The fact that he then promised to usurp probable cause in violation of the constitution is proof of the crime of perjury and proof that he intends to do exactly as Allison Bricker reported.<br /><br />You mention that Sheriff Hartman isn't the problem. If a sheriff swears an oath to obey and defend the constitution and then promises to violate it in writing, I think that qualifies as a problem.userjrg2157https://www.blogger.com/profile/06481998353632663378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1349436927283734572.post-81625323180453148942011-05-22T05:18:57.092-07:002011-05-22T05:18:57.092-07:00Probable cause and hot pursuit are standard in pol...Probable cause and hot pursuit are standard in police work today. I see your point regarding their Constitutionality, but I am not sure I agree with you, and I am not looking to debate that here.<br /><br />Police power is easy to abuse, and there are cops who abuse it. However, even probable cause and hot pursuit would have to be terribly and systematically abused, beyond any abuses I have heard of, before they would approach random house-to-house searches.<br /><br />I think Sheriff Hartman's explanation affirms that his office will do police work within standard, accepted interpretations of the Constitution (which, as you point out, may be erroneous), but that the Sheriff does not agree with the recent Indiana Supreme Court decision.<br /><br />In a way, your comment illustrates how all of this may have gotten started: Different people meaning and understanding different things with the same words.<br /><br />Our government at various levels is getting out of control; I just don't think Sheriff Hartman is the problem.Early Lighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02809034506804521618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1349436927283734572.post-45846623226730341452011-05-21T20:42:30.735-07:002011-05-21T20:42:30.735-07:00Apparently, the author of this article didn't ...Apparently, the author of this article didn't read Sheriff Hartman's statement very well. Let's see what Hartman did say. Notice how, at the end of the official statement, the Sheriff lists two reasons why he and his deputies will enter a property. One is a warrant and the other is probable cause. One is Constitutional. The other is a violation of the constitution. The definition and use of probable cause, as Sheriff Hartman uses it, is a perversion in the modern police state. Constitutionally, probable cause isn't at the discretion of peace officers. This disecretion is in the hands of judges and grand juries. Probable cause applies only to legal proceedings to obtain search and seizure warrants and grand jury indictments and nothing else. For a cop to conduct a search and seizure, not to mention entry, based upon his own determination of probable cause is criminal usurpation. In fact such usurpation allows cops to do whatever they want and make up excuses later. This is indeed what has been happening in our collapsing society. Instead of countering Allison Bricker's report, we can see that the Sheriff has written a carefully crafted deception to make the citizens of his county believe that he will never enter their homes without a warrant while simultaneously saying that he will do just that. The Sheriff has confirmed everything that Allison Bricker has said.userjrg2157https://www.blogger.com/profile/06481998353632663378noreply@blogger.com