Complaint to a Sheriff about a No-Knock Entry

by Harry Sweeney

Complaint To Sheriff on No-Knock Entry

A personal letter about a real event which happened to this author: When Cops Enter Your Home Without Knocking, Without Warrant, Without Probable Cause.

Note: This complaint, which is also addressed to the CSD (Child Services Division), is just one example of what is percieved as abuse of power and police harassment. The timing of this coincides with a peak in the investigation of illegal law enforcement actions with regards to land-grab issues. Within the same time frame I had already suffered other harassments, including being pulled over and trapped by a police car long enough to miss going to a cable TV show airing where I was to talk about the land grab and police involvement. In the same time frame, I was also pulled over and cited for speeding when I had not been, in an event where the officer was more interested in my tape recorder and its contents than anything else. Worse, in the same time frame, a man fitting the description of a key law enforcement figure in the land grab was involved in what everyone agrees was an attempt on my life, one undertaken beneath a video security camera. In light of these actions, it is perhaps a good thing I was not sitting next to a gun when the event described below ocurred. You be the judge. It should be mentioned that both the Sheriff and Child Services Division responded with a simple statement which did not even approach apology, and which defended the procedure as perfectly legal, though "it could have perhaps been handled better." These letters seemed cut from the same cookie cutter with virtually identical phraseology. My letter as follows:

2/22/95

Sherif Ris Bradshaw
Clackamas County Sheriffs Department
2223 S. Kaen Road
Oregon City, OR 97045

Mr. Bill Carey
Head Administrator
C.S.D. Central Office, MR 156
500 Summer St. NE
Salem, OR 97310-1012

Sheriff Bradshaw:

How would you like it if one day a couple of my friends and I were to come over to your house and just walk in the front door while you were watching TV? We wouldn't knock first, and when we entered, we wouldn't say a word. Would you like it better if we followed your kids in the front door - not asking them for permission, and not having been invited by them?

My guess is, you wouldn't like it. I bet you would like it even less if we were wearing guns and then ordered you to sit down when you tried to go to your children. Imagine how that might feel. If you tell me you wouldn't mind, I'd have to say you were a liar. Well, it happened to me, and I don't like it, either. The point is, it was your people who did it - and that makes you responsible.

Deputy Sheriffs D.J. Arnell II, L.L. Meharry, and Social Service Specialist Peggy Buytaert did exactly as described. It was supposedly a "courtesy call to advise that there was no problem." I found no courtesy in the manner of delivery of this unexpected message. Later, it was explained that entering as they did was probably not the best way they could have done it, but that it was not illegal or against policy. If this is the case, then I am free to enter your home, as well. However, you will not find me so foolish, arrogant, or abusive of your personal rights. Apparently your people have no such qualms.

It was also explained that the officers are trained to exercise assertive control when a subject seems agitated, and that is why they ordered me to sit down and denied me access to my children. I strongly object to this reasoning. If your people are going to invite themselves into someone's home at will, they should expect agitation. If I entered your home in this fashion, would you not become agitated? Any response of mine was driven by their action. They were interlopers, and I was defending my home and family. Further, I was not a subject of any investigation (their words), and certainly not subject to abusive authority under probable cause - for there was none.

As a freelance writer, I have been investigating illegal activities of members of various law enforcement agencies for several years. As a result, I have been subjected to a long list of harassments and meddlings involving several agencies - not just law enforcement. Call them dirty tricks, if you like, but they have destroyed my business and forced me into bankruptcy. There have been threats. Laser beams have been aimed into my bedroom window at night. We have been followed and surveilled. I have been approached by an officer with a drawn weapon concealed in a newspaper. Official investigations have been ludicrous. False police reports have been filed, stolen equipment not reported, witnesses not interviewed, leads ignored, false 911 reports filed, etc.

As a natural result, I don't have a lot of trust for government agencies when I become their further victim in a stunt like this. I began to wonder, how legitimate was the call? Why were they really there? Was it a set up? Were we in danger? Even were the call legitimate, and even if had they knocked politely at the front door as they should have, I would have wondered if someone had perhaps inspired their actions through trickery, such as an anonymous telephone complaint. I was assured this was not the case, in this instance. Still, I have questions.

Are both CSD and police to be automatically called if a child's comments or other indicators suggest child abuse might have taken place? Or, is it more proper to call CSD, the presumed experts, and have them make a preliminary determination, calling in law enforcement only if evidence of a crime exists? In this case, both were called. Why did the Sheriffs department get involved up front? Who made initial contact and requested their presence? These are not rhetorical questions. I expect detailed answers regarding policy in this matter, and who called whom, when.

Even before this event, my family, including my children, have been personally victimized by law enforcement. They have witnessed and experienced harassments first hand. They, too, don't trust cops just because they wear a uniform. I have tried to teach them that only a few are bad, but to be careful and not assume either way without reasonable indication. When cops walk into your home unannounced, it is reasonable indication that something is not right. It is fortunate that I did not overreact in some manner of self defense. This, too, is a risk that officers take if they choose to walk in unannounced.

So far, with the exception of family and friends in law enforcement, my children have only been exposed to bad cops. I resent that they were unnecessarily forced to answer personal and accusatory questions by and/or in the presence of such armed men. If a child truly had been a victim of child abuse, consider the undue pressure and additional fears this kind of approach creates - potentially frightening a child into something less than open cooperation.

For that matter, CSD holds no favor in my eyes either. In my investigations I have frequently encountered activists and others not viewed in favor by the power structure. They too, have been victimized by many of the same agencies and experienced many of the same harassments as have I. Sadly, many of those with children have had unhappy entanglements with CSD. So coincidental is this, that one might conclude that the same mentality that drives a vocal citizen or activist to confront corruption also begets child abuse. More likely, someone has found a way to manipulate system agencies and apply them as political weapons. Even outside of these related events, media has been full of CSD horror stories these last few years. In light of these observations, I am not moved towards confidence by the way this matter has been handled.

All three parties assured me that their findings were that no child abuse had been undertaken, but that most likely, the injury to my daughter reported and investigated (described as a bruise on the shoulder, but which examination revealed to be a coin-sized patch of micro-scratches) was determined to have been reasonably caused by horseplay, as confirmed by her sister. They further assured me that there would be no follow up investigation, charges, or official records maintained other than those contained in their personal notes and logs. Under the circumstances, I do not find their verbal assurances adequate. My counsel agrees. It is too easy to create and maintain false records or misapply records, either deliberately, through carelessness, or even innocent misunderstanding.

I require a written statement confirming the facts as related. I further wish to know what files are maintained on me and/or my family by your agency, and what material is contained therein. I ask you to place a copy of this letter and your response(s) in your files, and if a file is maintained on me, to place a copy of each there, as well.

You are accountable for these events and for answering my concerns. What do you have to say for yourself, your agency, and the actions taken in this matter?

Sincerely
Harry Sweeney