COP: ‘I’m Going to Grab Your Baby, and Don’t Resist’

If the police have information that someone in the home is being harmed, refusing to open the door will accomplish nothing. LOL

 

lol

 

So this is pretty much a denial of a womans right to chose huh? This "lump of tissue" is not independent and cant survive without someone providing substinance, and the mental capacity isnt there for it to realize what it needs, the parents had every right (according to liberals anti-life) narrative to do what they were doing right?

 

Its what is behind the door that will accomplish the job.

- - - Updated - - -

When it comes to the kids, yep. Bad as I need to be. And I can be real bad.
You libs can let the G run roughshod over you and your parental rights,dont expect everyone else to just bend over and take it.

 

Not everyone who disagrees with your asinine notions is a "lib" there bruh. I'm fairly conservative. I just happen to believe that hindering the police is not necessary to be a "conservative"

Now you may dumb enough to believe that the version of this story we heard from the parents only is unbiased and completely true, or you simply wish to believe it b/c it affirms your preconceived notions, but I am not. I'm 100% sure of only one thing, and that is that we don't know the entire story. I assure you CPS doesn't show up with the cops to take your child away based on nothing more than doctors say so.

 

Why don't you put the entirety of the order? Perhaps that is why you skipped the link?

These parents are hardly "exonerated" from taking rash action that could have endangered their baby.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...le-who-had-5-month-old-baby-seized-by-police/

 

Yes...the child is six months old.....six months and a day ago, this "empowered" woman would be lauded for her "inner strength and courage" to exercise her government issued "rights" to exterminate it.

 

But if the homeowner can show reasonable evidence that no one is being harmed, the police can't legally enter.

If the parents showed the police a copy of the discharge paperwork, the police should have no justification to enter the home or to take the child. They would then be breaking and entering, as well as kidnapping.

 

The doctor says they went around the procedure for refusing service and taking thier child.
I call that BS. I have to fill out paperwork to take my child home? What if the doctor refuses to sign off on it.
Its called parental rights. I guess they just mean anything anymore.

 

Kelly Patricia O’Meara wrote for Citizens Commission on Human Rights International 23 April 2013:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s been two years since Detroit mother, Maryanne Godboldo, withstood an armed assault by a SWAT team and a tank, assault weapons and helicopter, accouterments worthy of a Die Hard film, determined to kidnap, by force, her then 13-year old daughter, Ariana. The alleged crime? Godboldo refused to give Ariana harmful psychiatric drugs. The 55-year old Godboldo, after an hours-long standoff, gave herself up to police, was taken into custody and charged with multiple felony counts. Godboldo’s attorney, Allison Folmar, firmly believed in Godboldo’s parental rights and never wavered in her support. Much to her credit, Folmar has represented Godboldo pro-bono throughout the judicial proceedings and was pleased when, in August of 2011, all charges were dropped against Godboldo. ..."We won at the district level and the judge saw the case for what it is… the illegal conduct of police. They had no probable cause and no valid order to enter Maryanne’s home.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

article

Maryanne Godboldo is now suing the state, Wayne County, and Detroit police for illegally taking her child.

 

You're wrong.If the police feel someone is being harmed inside the home for whatever reason, they do NOT have to have to your permission to enter. They do have to knock, but if you refuse to answer or refuse entry, they can force entry.

IE if neighbors report that you are beating your wife and the cops show up they aren't going to just take your word for it that she's okay, they are going to want to check it out for themselves. Same thing here. They aren't just going to assume the first doctor was wrong , the second doctor right and go away.

Again, common sense.

 

A hospital can not just keep your child , and they certainly can't operate on them without your permission, but again there are procedures in place . You dont just ignore the rules and take your baby out of an ICU without telling anyone b/c you don't like what the doctor had to say.

If they had not had done so, then the police would not have been at their house to begin with. Get it?

 

So you just storm trooper the home and take a child?
Yea, that sound reasonable. In Nazi Germany.
Doctors and patients disagree all the time.
Second opinion is standard practice, any doctor that says dont do it has an ulterior motive. Usually finacial.

 

I've seen this a couple time in this thread. "You simply don't do this, you simply don't do that.". What law are you referring to? What law did the parents break by taking the child to another hospital, where they were released by both the hospital and law enforcement?

You can't justify this by sating "you simply don't _____.".

 

Sure you can, they dared to question authority.
They dared to think for themselves.
They kinda "got out of line". Had to send the attitude adjusters over to thier house and show them who is boss.
Ya know.

 

Apparently, to you, the child is the property of the state.

 

If they have served their time, why should they not have access to the means of self defense? If they are still prone to violence, why are they free, anyway?

There are legal ramifications and there are immediate ramifications. In either case, the state will come down hard on anyone who kills one of it's agents, whether in the form of a thug scrum of more officers, or later prosecutions for all sorts of vague "crimes."

I think many believe that there are other purposes, but the purpose is always about controlling people in some fashion. Laws have no effect on objects nor can objects be punished. Only people can be punished or treated as criminals.

 

But you can deny them entry and call your wife to the door. If she shows no signs of harm, they have no justification to enter. The police have to have both probable cause and exigent circumstances to forcibly enter a home. A telephone tip is not enough to fit these requirements. Here is a paper that lists quite a few cases where courts ruled against social workers and police. There have been numerous cases where families who were so invaded sued their cities and won because of police and/or social workers forcing entry without a warrant.

A great example was Calabretta v. Floyd, 189 F.3d 808 (9th Cir. 1999) which actually ruled against a social worker who coerced entry. The social worker threatened to break the door down, so the homeowner opened the door. Even though the homeowner allowed the worker entry, the court determined that entry was coerced and therefore unlawful.

Here is a news report about a case from about a year ago very similar to the abuse one you described:

The interesting thing is that the ruling is all based on the unlawful entry, regardless of the he-said/she-said aspect of the brutality. Just a report that there was an assault is not enough for cops to enter a home without permission.

I hope the parents in the OP case sue their city for these actions. The fourth amendment is a critical part of our society and what protects Americans from a tyrannical police state. Citizens need to do what they can to protect their rights and hold the people entrusted with authority accountable.

 

Your example is irrelevant because in the case you mentioned, the alleged victim had already been interviewed and wasn't even in the home that the man was in when police made entry, she was at her own apartment across town. Invalidating any emergency.

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/north_bay&id=8675545

In that example, I agree the police were wrong.

I'm sure that was an oversight on your part and not a deliberate attempt to deceive.

 

Oh BS, since when is trying to protect their child taking "rash" action. They took THEIR child from one hospital they didn't exactly trust to another for a second opinion. The only mistake they made was not filling out paper work. BFD! For that, you support governments knee jerk, asinine actions? That's your prerogative, I don't.

 

Yes, we are. People in the US apparently have "freedom fatigue". Problem is, they're so poorly educated they don't understand what happens when they forfeit freedom for some imagined form of security.

 

And what if the first doctor had been right and the second wrong and the child died as a result? BFD???

 

actually we have become a nation full of whiny babies who want to (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) about the government being responsible for their every failure.

"wah the mean old government comes and investigates when someone thinks I may have harmed my kids, those kids are MINE dammit"

Does the government act correctly in every respect? Hell no, but if you're brain dead enough to believe that in EVERY case the government over stepped when the person involved hadn't done anything wrong, well I pity you.

 

Interesting, isn't it? If the paperwork had been filled out then, apparently, the child would have been "safe." There's something magical about bureaucracy in the mind of some.

 

Correct. If the paperwork had been filled out then the first doctor would have had to have agreed that the baby was safe.

Pretty simple to understand actually.

And again, if you really believe that the cops and CPS showed up to these people's house and assured themselves that the baby was safe and then grabbed her anyway because the paperwork wasn't filled out correctly; well only a stupid person would believe that.