Do the police bare any responsibility or is it up to the (sometimes) poor, (sometimes) innocent homeowner?
Two recent high-profile cases Bryan Kohberger - 29yo, in grad school 2000 miles from his parents. If he had an apartment 2000 miles away, you could make a case he didn’t live with his parents & that he was just visiting. He was pulled over twice on the trip home for winter break, supposedly looking for evidence but not arrested either time. SWAT team kicked doors/windows in the middle of the night causing damage to the parents property.
Rex Heuermann Gilgo Beach serial killer suspect - lived with his (now-estranged) wife & kids until his arrest three weeks ago. At this time they are not suspects & are believed to have been away when he is alleged to have committed the murders. I understand the need to collect evidence but they left the place absolutely trashed
This varies by location, and it’s often a contentious matter. Generally the police do not clean anything up. Generally they don’t destroy things either, just turn over furniture and toss the contents of drawers at worst. I’ve heard of lawsuits to have the government cover clean up costs, and even when there’s no basis for the warrant they may not defray the costs without a lawsuit.
These pictures aren’t very helpful. We don’t know what it looked like before the cops went in. But judging by all the clutter, it was probably pretty bad. It’s not like the cops brought in a half-ton of garbage in the back of a VW Microbus.
Here, if they can’t find anything they have to put it all back together. But if they find something that can justify it, even if it’s unrelated to the original search warrant, they can leave the place trashed without consequences.
In this case Forest Gate raid - Wikipedia they accidentally shot one of the occupants during the course of the raid, due to their inability to handle their guns safely. They tore the house apart trying to find something to pin on them, to the point where it needed expensive structural work to make it habitable again. They couldn’t find anything concealed in the house.
On 3 August 2006, the Independent Police Complaints Commission concluded that the shooting was an “accident”. They said that based on forensic evidence, “there is no evidence of intent or recklessness on the part of the firearms officer and that no offence was committed in the firing of the weapon.” Scotland Yard released a statement saying it regretted that an accidental discharge had caused injury.
There is no such thing as “accidentally” shooting someone. Anyone with firearms training knows this. Unless the gun had some weird defect that allows it to be fired without pulling a trigger, the only way for this to happen is due to negligence. That’s why “accidental discharge” isn’t a term used by anyone familiar with firearms, the proper term is “negligent discharge”. One of the core tenets of firearms usage is trigger discipline, and a police officer would have been extensively trained in that.
I know we’re all pedants here, but I’m with @Atamasama in terms of usage and nuance to the terms.
Accidents generally happen when unexpected or uncontrollable factors occur. A negligent discharge is not an accident in that sense. It is a willful, negligent behavior. It is (assumed) an unintentional act, so in that sense, very similar to an accident, but for someone who has the training (such as the police officer) on safe firearms usage to disregard multiple points of their SOP.
I’d possibly see ‘accident discharge’ apply to the (sadly all too common) circumstances where a young child who has no idea of reality (2-4, sometimes older) accidently shoots someone while playing with their parent/caregivers gun: they would literally not know better, but a police officer certainly should be held to a higher standard.
Part of the problem is that a lot of folks not comfortable with firearms don’t know what the trained safe actions ARE. One example that almost never shows up in visual media is that you are trained to never have your finger within the trigger guard unless you’re about to shoot, ie sights on target and ready to take the shot. That right there prevents a huge number of reflexive ‘negligent discharges’ because you need to take a moment’s thought to do so.
Are police trained to that standard? I would suspect so, but I also bet that they are lazy on that particular discipline, because many gun users are. It’s a slightly unnatural feeling, which is good because it makes you aware of the danger you’re about to put yourselves and others in.
But we can stay with a narrow definition if you like, it’s non-intentional or accidental if you insist, but it’s absolutely negligent or reckless. An auto ‘accident’ you cause by blowing through a red light at 70mph is also labeled an accident, but few would deny you are also fully responsible for said accident.
As long as police are acting reasonably, all responsibility for damage falls squarely at the feet of the person they were attempting to arrest. On the off chance that your home is collateral damage in someone else’s arrest, that someone else is who you’ll need to seek compensation from. - SOURCE
In short, it is on the homeowner. The police owe you nothing.
I want to say we have had a similar question on the SDMB before but I cannot find it (maybe this one but I remember a different one I cannot find). IIRC even if the police raid the wrong house they are still not liable for their actions unless you could prove it was willful (good luck with that). Qualified immunity is a tough hurdle to overcome. Hell, there are plenty of cases where the family dog is shot for no reason and nothing happens.
There’s also the issue of property being confiscated (even though no charges were laid) and not returned without major legal costs. Like homes, cars, cash, personal items/keepsakes.
If you’re talking about civil forfeiture that’s a completely different matter. The police in those cases are arresting your money for committing a crime and holding it for a trial when it can defend itself against the charges and if found innocent you’ll still never see the money again.
Unless you’re talking about the cops just outright stealing your money while they toss your home. That’s different because there never was any money. Are you calling those cops liars?
That article is specifically talking about a barricade situation. Kohberger family didn’t know the cops were there until their front door was in their front yard. He wasn’t given the opportunity to surrender, or his parents kick him out before damage to the house occurred. Yes, he’s charged with multiple murders but they were able to stop him twice on his cross-country drive & were watching the house for days. He was compliant at the other two traffic stops so there’s no reason to think he wouldn’t be if they attempted another one.