Judicial Rubber-Stamping of Search Warrants Can Be Deadly
Lethal drug raids in Louisville and Houston were based on fishy police affidavits that turned out to be fraudulent.

According to a federal indictment unsealed last week, Breonna Taylor, a 26-year-old EMT and aspiring nurse who was killed during a 2020 drug raid in Louisville, Kentucky, died because a cop lied. According to a 2019 federal indictment, the same is true of Dennis Tuttle and Rhogena Nicholas, a middle-aged couple killed during a drug raid in Houston that year.
When police officers invent facts to obtain search warrants, they are committing crimes, violating the Fourth Amendment, and instigating potentially lethal confrontations without a legal basis. Although outright lies may be difficult to detect in advance, more rigorous judicial review of police affidavits could have made a crucial difference in both of these cases.
When Louisville Detective Joshua Jaynes sought a warrant to search Taylor's apartment in March 2020, he claimed he had "verified through a U.S. Postal Inspector" that suspected drug dealer Jamarcus Glover, Taylor's former boyfriend, had been "receiving packages" at her apartment. After the raid that killed Taylor, Jaynes told investigators that information actually came from a colleague, Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly, who supposedly told Jaynes "nonchalantly" that Glover "just gets Amazon or mail packages there."
According to the indictment against Jaynes, both claims were false. Furthermore, Jaynes' suggestion that the packages might contain drugs or drug money was inconsistent with the reference to Amazon shipments. Glover, who was arrested elsewhere the same night that police killed Taylor, told the Louisville Courier-Journal that "nothing illegal" was delivered to her apartment—just "shoes and clothes"—and that Taylor was not involved in his drug dealing.
Even with the ambiguous reference to "packages," the evidence implicating Taylor in her ex-boyfriend's criminal activities was thin. Jaynes reported that he had seen Glover outside Taylor's apartment and that he had seen Taylor's car parked in front of a house used by Glover "on different occasions," although he did not specify when or in what circumstances.
Although Jefferson County Circuit Judge Mary Shaw may not have realized that Jaynes invented a conversation with a postal inspector, it should have been obvious that the evidence against Taylor, based entirely on guilt by association, was much weaker than the evidence against Glover. Yet Shaw approved a warrant for a no-knock, middle-of-the-night search of Taylor's apartment along with four other warrants for houses linked to Glover, all within 12 minutes.
After the Houston raid that killed Tuttle and Nicholas, it turned out that a veteran narcotics officer, Gerald Goines, had fabricated a heroin sale to falsely implicate them in drug dealing. While Municipal Court Judge Gordon Marcum, who approved the no-knock warrant for the couple's home, may never have imagined that Goines was making the whole thing up, there were clues that the officer's affidavit was fishy.
Although Goines claimed he had been investigating drug activity at Tuttle and Nicholas' home for two weeks, he had not bothered to find out who lived there. Goines said he had "advised" a confidential informant that "narcotics were being sold and stored" at the house, but he cited no evidence of that, notwithstanding his two-week investigation.
Goines claimed another narcotics officer, Steven Bryant, had recognized the "brown powder" that the informant supposedly bought at the house as heroin, a detail that Bryant later contradicted. One wonders what Bryant would have said if Marcum had asked him to verify Goines' account.
Local prosecutors discovered that Goines, who was employed by the Houston Police Department for 34 years, had been similarly creative in other cases, citing drug purchases that never happened to justify searches and arrests. He also had a history of justifying no-knock warrants by citing firearms they were never recovered—a suspicious pattern that no one noticed until it was too late for Tuttle and Nicholas.
When judges rubber-stamp warrants without asking basic questions or pausing to consider whether police have established probable cause, they forsake their responsibility to protect our constitutional rights. The result is unjustified home invasions that can have deadly consequences.
© Copyright 2022 by Creators Syndicate Inc.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Judicial rubber stamp of search warrents? Good thing the doj doesn't do that against political opponents
Perhaps an FBI agent detected the odor of classified archival documents while standing on the sidewalk. Or an unnamed confidential informant who totally wasn’t let off a minor possession charge made up a story about seeing some suspicious looking boxes.
Out of curiosity, how can a President --- the person with unilateral control of what and what is not classified --- be guilty of taking classified information?
The law isn't about whether the records were classified, but who owns them.
Funny how hypocritical democrats always are about the rule of law.
I am creating eighty North American nation greenbacks per-hr. to finish some web services from home. I actually have not ever thought adore it would even (res-08) realizable but my friend mate got $27k solely in four weeks simply doing this best assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.
.
>>>>>>> https://workhere3.blogspot.com/
I'm sure they often are. But it does tend to be the GOP who harp on about "law and order". And it is very evident that the bulk of GOP supporters somehow think that Trump should genuinely be exempt from investigation as though indeed he were above the law
Do "the people" own them? Can I have a look?
When you're not President anymore you no longer have classification or possession authority.
One of his top NSA aides was in the room with him when he declassified the documents.
IIRC under the presidential records act regardless of whether the docs were declassified, they are not Trump's to retain.
Obama has most of his documents, instead of the National Archives, and promised years ago to digitize them and make them available to the National Archives. But he hasn't. Why isn't his home being raided?
Oh yeah, those documents show how Obama's administration corrupted the government to go against his political opponents, and it's continued under Biden.
As to your question, the President doesn't have the power to declassify document after he's out of office. What's questionable, is how bureaucrats blocked Trump's declassification of the Russian Hoax documents. It's amazing how the 1/6 committee wants all of Trump's presidential and personal documents seen, except the ones Trump declassified which they don't want anyone to see.
Lol. They are just fucking with the commenters now.
"They're gonna mock the hell out of me"
Jacob Sullum, before posting an article about warrant abuse the day after a high profile FBI raid on a former president.
How much kool aid do you have to drink to still worship Jim Jones after the Jonestown Massacre?
Trump's very, very slowly starting to face the consequences of committing treason for money. We know he did. He's admitted it in public statements on many occasions. FFS, stop defending him. You have to be batshit insane.
Cite? What evidence? What statements? The TDS and projection is strong here
TDS has indeed driven you insane. But please support lawfare. 6 years of constant investigations. Walls are closing in.
It is odd how freely you authoritariajs support going after a man instead of going after crimes.
That statement makes a whole lot more sense if you were talking about Biden or Clinton but as it stands I must conclude you have no grasp of reality.
Well I don't know about "treason". But there are indeed certain people who are willing to follow Trump off a cliff.
Is it really so hard to believe that a guy who bragged about having sex with hookers, bragged about bribing US Senators in New York, bragged about stealing land from old ladies in order to build a parking garage, would be less than scrupulous in carrying out boxes of documents in checking which ones were 'top secret' or not?
...Trump, unilaterally, could declassify anything he wanted up to 1/20/21.
They don't care about reality, jeff lives in his own ignorance. Ignore every president has had these back and forth with the records agency. Ignore trump was working with the agency, so no raid was needed. Jeff supports lawfare.
love it Davedave! OBL needs a friend.
Nothing in my post supports Trump, but you knew that. I'd say that you're the one who's batshit insane, but bats are an important part of the ecosystem, and I wouldn't want to insult them.
"After the raid that killed Taylor, Jaynes told investigators that information actually came from a colleague, Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly, who supposedly told Jaynes "nonchalantly" that Glover "just gets Amazon or mail packages there."
According to the indictment against Jaynes, both claims were false."
So, he didn't just make up shit about alleged suspects (AKA innocent people), but also made up shit to throw a fellow officer under the bus in an attempt to save his own ass? Sounds like a stand-up guy.
Not unlike SWATting someone to send gullible, lethal agents of the state to show up to a victim’s home and shoot them.
Still more legit info than the entire justification for the FBI surveillance of Trump for years.
Just keep that in mind.
Now you motherfuckers are just trolling us.
Indeed, they are.
Damn good article. You do have it in you! Now the bar is raised.
Except he and this organization have done such a thorough job defiling their reputation I'm more inclined to believe every word is a lie for some leftist agenda.
Reason could interview DJT regarding this, if they weren’t terrified of being
retaliated against by the Democratsflagged for misinformation.As if Trump would give an interview to Reason. He only goes on friendly media outlets now.
How do you stop judges from rubber-stamping warrant applications? In single-judge areas, you're not going to get elected without the police endorsement and in multi-judge areas the cops know which judges ask too many questions and which don't ask any questions at all. Then you have people like the Lucas County (Toledo) clerk of courts who issued warrants for years who didn't know warrants required affidavits and didn't know she could refuse to issue the warrant, or the judge who signed blank warrants for the cops to use when he went on vacation. You're going to have to start holding judges accountable for their rubber-stamping, looking at how many, if any, warrant requests they ever deny.
Yesterday: Judicial-rubber-stamping-of-search-warrants-can-be-deadly
Today: Crossing the street in the Bronx, NY, can be deadly.
Tomorrow: Shit happens, deal with it.
So there's inadvertent misinformation in warrants, routine human screw-up misinformation, and deliberately made-up shit. What percentage of warrants are entirely accurate? 25%? Accuracy isn't required because it's so rare that they will ever be checked. It's only when the shit hits the fan when it all unravels.
Al Pacino was right: "You're out of order! You're out of order! "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sA0glbG6c-8
So a "journalist" who's job is to ask questions and get facts right but cannot because it conflicts with his narrative and instead makes up shit is taking someone else to task for making shit up and not asking questions? GFY you marxist propagandist.
Now do Bruce Reinhart.
Getting mail somewhere means nothing, I still get mail for the previous owners and tenants of my house, some of whom haven't lived here since the 90s.
Amazon packages are also meaningless, I know someone who continued to use their ex's Prime accounts for years after they broke up.
every year I get the Harley Davidson Police yearbook/catalogue because a cop lived in my house like '94-'97
Maybe we should hold police to the same level of scrutiny that we hold DoJ lawyers who lie on FISA court warrant applications? And the same punishment. Or is it only okay if falsifying information to a court is done in pursuit of the "correct" target? It is quite astonishing that the Heinrich Himmler... er... Merrick Garland DoJ would criminally charge the cops for something that only merits probation when done by his own agency.
Shocked courts do not ever consider the treatment of others committing the identical crime and the massive disparity in sentencing.
What about when federal magistrates rubber stamp them Sullum.