The Glade 4.0

Or it seems to be the argument the defense is using in this case from Ct that is getting quite a bit of national exposure.

Its it hard to tell, but from listening to and reading various news outlets, but from what I can discern, the defense for the defendants appears to be making the argument that not only is client "less guilty" than the other guy (this state doesn't allow that argument... the hand of one is the hand of all), but most surprisingly, seems to be taking the tack that if the police had responded in a different manner than what their procedures allow, the two men either wouldn't have had to time to commit the sexual assualt x2, murder x3, attempting murder x1 and arson x1 and therefore wouldn't be facing those charges... or if the police had made it known they were on the scene, it would have altered the defendants behavior such that none of those crimes would have been committed... essentially they thought they were getting away with it.

WTF. I mean seriously, WTF. Are the new reports that badly done and the defense is not actually taking that position? Some of you live up that way and I am sure are getting more information than I am in the south, but as it is, I am completely baffled by that defense.

<HK-47 on>
Anticipation: Partial percent of arguments made in ensuing posts will be of the opinion that it is the fault of the police, because everything is the fault of the police. The remaining percentage of the arguments made in the ensuing posts will be of the opinion that it is not the police at fault, because the police are never at fault.

Meatbags.
</HK-47 off>

Any sources on the defense's strategy? The article you linked only contains summary of the testimony of the cop and some facts of the case.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

I'll have to look, but some of it is from reading multiple sources about the direction of the questioning, the change in the plea (both men were going to plead guilty), and some specific comments, paraphrased, from the defense.

I don't have a single souce with explicit language, which is why I was hoping someone closer to the story with better reporting could clarify, or provide additional information.

Some links from a Hartford paper:

http://www.courant.com/topic/crime-law- ... 0033.topic



My guess is the defense attorney knows his client is going to be convicted, so his goal with this line of questioning is to (i) deflect some of the jury's anger to the cops, and (ii) establish a basis for arguing that the defendants didn't plan to kill anyone, but simply panicked due to the cops' response. Basically, I think he's grasping at straws to at least keep his client off death row.

Recent thoughts on these situations point to the benefits of the first responders being prepared to make immediate entry. That requires a better trained and armed police force.

Also a few private citizens splattering these F#$)(#'s brains across a few windows would go a long way to deterring the behavior.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

Up to a point yes. The biggest problem with making an immidiate entry is having enough people to do it. Unless we get some sort of Sci-Fi power armored suit that grants a single person an overwhelming advantage over multiple adversaries, that's a serious problem. It isn't a matter of even having enough cops; it's having enough cops at the right place at the right time. Moreover, any building entry is a team effort and requires coordination to avoid endangering each other. Some processes, such as moving up a staircase, are hideously complicated in ways that are very difficult to understand until you've done it. I remember being astounded at how complex it was when I went through that kind of training. When you have a situation like this, your choices for entry are either A) wait for the SWAT team that has trained together, has the equipment, and has the numbers or B) sacrifice those advantages in order to act quickly (which is often necessry in situations like Columbine or VT) and take the risk of sending in the first four guys to show up, who may not even be from the same agency, or really know each other.

In order to make an entry, you need AT LEAST two people just to enter the building, and really for anything bigger than a typical residence you need four. That's a bare minimum to do it at all, more are really needed to do it well. You need more to set up a perimeter too; entering without one is possible but hardly advisable.

It's not as bad at a single-family residence, because it's fairly small, but you're not likely to know how the place is laid out in advance and there's not a lot of room for mistakes. Most of the tactics surrounding immediate entry have focused on schools, for obvious reasons. Schools are horendous to search even at night for a simple burglar alarm when you know there are no hostages. Doing it with actual people present is **** hard.



Indeed.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Well you don't need more people if you move in recklessley. Slicing pie and all takes time but dramatically increases safety.

Of course other alternatives exist like smoke, OC, flashbangs, laser disorientors (though those tend to suck). Ways to dramatically lower the ability of those inside to act or react to an entry or to force them to flee. Of course then you have other considerations, property damage, legal liability for those with heart or lung conditions, and general cost - how many flashbangs you gonna carry on a night on patrol - how many are you going to use, how many is there actually a situation inside that requires it.

That said the standard response to active shooter scenarios needs to change on a large scale (thankfully some people are pushing that more and more these days).

ALso I have the sniffles.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

It is the fault of the perpetrators of the crime. Period.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Agreed.

_________________

The first one is a feasible reasoning, but the questioning from the defense attorney doesn't appear to be going that route... the second doesn't make any sense, as someone panicked doesn't rape first and then kill.

As for the death row... from what I read, the two defendants were going to, or already had, plead guilty and were not up for death sentencing with plea. Now though, since they insist on trying it, the prosecution is going for the death penalty, and rightfully so in my opinion.

Perhaps they should try the Chewbacca defense?

_________________
"Life isn't divided into genres. It's a horrifying, romantic, tragic, comical, science-fiction cowboy detective novel. You know, with a bit of pornography if you're lucky."
— Alan Moore

I didn't say it was a good argument. *grin* I just don't think he's got anything else, at least based on the press accounts.


Hm, one of the articles I read said the defendants had tried, several times, to plead guilty, but the prosecutor rejected the offers because it was such a slam dunk anyway.

Interesting, I suppose I didn't know it was up to the prosecutor to accept pleas. I thought that was up to the judiciary.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

Usually its done as a deal. The defendant agrees to plead guilty to a lesser charge in exchange for no being prosocuted for a higher charge. The Prosocutor can refuse the deal and go ahead an prosocute for the more serious charge. Other than remorse (or utter lack thereof) or an attempt to garner sympathy by throwing self at the mercy of the court, there is no incentive to plead guilty to the highest charge.

*chuckle* Just looked it up. And actually, I think that's exactly what their doing!

Community paper with a lot of articles on the case

Both defendants offered to plead guilty to the crimes in exchange for Life, but according to on article, it was rejected by the prosecution. However, another article suggested that Hayes wanted to plead anyway, but his defense team talked him out of it.

Its also interesting just how desperate the defense attorney is in regards to this case. He has gone completely over the side in my opinion.

Haven't you ever watched Law and Order? Egads!

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

Well, my mind created a distinction between a "plea bargain" and a "plea."

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

There is a difference DFK!; a plea is what you state in court before the judge and a plea bargain is what you do with the DA/ADA stating how you will plead and what penalties they will recommend prior to standing before the judge. In either instance plea/plea bargain, the Judge has final say as to whether the plea/plea bargain is accepted.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

You actually need even more people because your casualties are likely to go up, and a cop who gets shot not only doesn't help anyone else but demands even more people to deal with him being injured.



Those are all considerations, but equipment is not an alternative for enough people on the scale of most police operations. You can trade quantity for quality and vice versa in large organizations, but in small ones on the scale of law enforcement hostage situations, there isn't enough quantity in the first place to trade it away for better equipment and still expect equal or better results.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."