10 Comment
2 Ratings:

5 Agents busted in my home, part 2 security camera


  • Alienator#

    Alienator December 26, 2010 7:48:15 PM CET

    You have the right to shoot all this idiots down.It´s your private home and they don´t give you their names. So on the graves also don´t is any name to see. :-)Brave lady....I give you my applause for that video.The best way to fight against this unlawfull bastards is to cought them on tape.

  • Lolwtf#

    Lolwtf May 16, 2010 1:24:02 PM CEST

    That is UNBELIEVABLE! What gives them the right to break a door to gain access to a persons home? The way these gentlemen acted was inappropriate. If this is allowed to happen in America then what kind of democracy is this? Why isn't this stuff on the news? On the other hand I would of waited for them to gain access to my house, and walk threw the door. Good thing you have a camera.

  • Unida#

    Unida April 13, 2010 6:14:43 PM CEST

    As someone who lives in one of the most liberal countries on this planet; this video absolutely infuriates me. Please tell me you're going to take legal action and try to get these agents out of the government.

  • Ninammam#

    Ninammam April 13, 2010 9:38:15 AM CEST

    She said he was not there! Your an annoying BITCH!

  • Sttoad#

    Sttoad April 12, 2010 5:06:52 PM CEST

    Man this pisses me off. Local laws supersede Federal laws. However local laws do not include invasion and search without a warrant. This police force is crooked and needs to be replaced. Simple rule of thumb though, avoid people who do not follow the rules set out by society.If you get into bar fights and do not like it then stay out of the bars. Of all the senses how come Common is the least used?

  • zerox#

    zerox April 12, 2010 8:13:01 AM CEST

    No, simply no. Local law never supersedes county, state, or federal. Federal is the highest authority. No matter the state you live in, they have to produce the warrant upon demand. If they cannot, they are in violation of the law. They have to list specifically what or who they are searching for and the address the warrant is for. If they cannot, they are breaking and entering, unless you invite them in. If they do not find what they are looking for, that is illegal search and seizure. If this happened in my old town, you better believe those officers would have left in body bags. Well that one there would have left with like two or three, hard to tell on video.

  • Eyezwideopen#

    Eyezwideopen April 6, 2010 5:31:20 PM CEST

    Carl, I found your response sooooooo much better. However, you say local laws. can I assume that you do not believe that they supersede Federal law ? Because it is my understanding ( albeit a layman's and a Canadian one at that ) that the highest power in the U.S.A. To administer law is the state sheriff. The sheriff could waggle his third digit at the president and have him escorted to the state line. I have no doubt that the Federal governments response would be a sudden withdraw of all Federal funding and exponential increase in red tape for even thinking about the capital letter %u201CF%u201D. In the real world there is assassination, extreme political pressure by powerful groups both known and unknown, and there is a balance, yes yes I know. But I digress. My point is DO NOT surrender your rights. In the video she surrendered hers by not cracking him on the head with a frying pan when he stuck it through the window. LOL. Lets move on. It would be a different story if they were chasing the guy and they seen him enter the house. They could have kicked the door in without a second thought and she could have been arrested for obstruction if she interfered. But thats not what happened. If they had probable cause they would have had a warrant. I don't think an adult man can really relate to the need for an elderly lady to scurry away when some one is banging on the door. As for your credentials.... my hat is tipped Sir. That was fun add me as a friend yes yes. Larry

  • Cia212#

    Cia212 April 6, 2010 10:24:55 AM CEST

    Eyezwideopen,I too believe constitutional rights supersede local laws, but, in this case, the only way a constitutionally protected right was violated is if the Sheriff's Department had no reason to believe Joe Baker might have been at the address. As an attorney stated in Lilbuddhaman's link:Attorney H.A. Sala says based on the video evidence, the Sheriff's Department could have a lawsuit on its hands because of the way they forced into the home without any knowledge of the wanted person being in the home.But he assumes the Sheriff's Department acted "without any knowledge of the wanted person being in the home." This is what I stated earlier, "the only question is whether or not probable cause is established." Again, you don't have to be in possession of a bench warrant to act on it, so they were right in stating, "I don't have it" during the exchange. He already stated that a bench warrant was issued, but he didn't have it with him and didn't need to have it. All that aside, she clearly knows the man - Joe Baker. But she hides in the house for several minutes before launching into a tirade. I've had police come to both my office and home before, I get the door give a quick answer and it's done. The anger is better saved for the real threats - yes FEMA is one. Boy, do I have some FEMA stories!As for my frustrated aspirations of being in law enforcement or the CIA, no, I'm just a lowly attorney. Entertainment law mostly but I'm also a computer animation and indie movie geek. C.I.A.? My initials, but you can call me Carl.I did cross the cunt line too quickly.

  • Lilbuddhaman#

    Lilbuddhaman April 6, 2010 3:43:14 AM CEST

    update: http://www.kget.com/news/local/story/She riffs-department-launches-internal/V6wT6L FFpke93tb_h6XCLg.cspx According to another Bondsman and local police, it was illegal...

  • Eyezwideopen#

    Eyezwideopen April 6, 2010 2:15:20 AM CEST

    Dear Mr. Cia12, First Sir, I would like to apologize for the sharpness of my of my response. I do not wish anybody into a F.E.M.A. Camp. Nor do I wish to engage you in a debate in law as I hold no expertise in the field. I'm sure you believe that you are qualified, I.E. security guard, failed attempt(s) at law enforcement, always dreamed of becoming a C.I.A agent. So you secretly studied in all your spare time. But that does not qualify you to a position of expertise. But that is not the arena in witch I choose to debate you, or the reason for my response. The problem lies in the idea that you believe the law is above constitutional rights and freedoms, and I believe it is the other way around. I hope the fact that I tried a little harder with my grammar and punctuation made it so you would not be so distracted that you would miss the message. P.S. Anybody that uses %u201Ccunt%u201D in sentence, waives the right to bitch about grammar. OPEN YOUR EYES !!

Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook