Good news, but the decision to deny cert means the effect is too limited.
err, excuse me, they didn't deny cert, they just let the decision stand. Regardless, i wish they would have said something concrete.
sure they do:http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2009/10/syracuse_police_searching_for.html
Not at all the same thing. Witnesses are not anonymous. And gunshots bring "exegent circumstances" into the equation.The officers couldn't go in if there was only an anonymous call saying that gunshots came from that house and nothing else to corroborate that info, like witnesses or actually hearing gunshots.The whole point of not giving anonymous calls any credibility is to prevent police themselves from making the call.
Did the witnesses say the shooter was in the house where the dog lived? Would u have tried to save the PET dog?
I believe yes. And I don't know. I wasn't there.
"witnesses directed officers TOWARD THE AREA of Beck’s house as the source of shots"Your reading comprehension could use a wee tad bit of work. "Toward the area of the house" is not the same as "from the house."Of course, if he asked the witnesses if itt might have been fireworks then the pet wouldn't be dead. But the cretins don't care about that. They probably laughed their heads off after they ran over the dog.
Post a Comment