92 Year old woman shot in Atlanta after firing on cops

Agree with MagnumMike.

I don't do 'em but drugs should be legal. Just look at all the crime that disappeared following the repeal of prohibition.

Legalize, commercialize, regulate and tax them and all that crime will go away. And maybe we can save social security and medicare with the additional tax revenue.
 
How are you going to "commercialize" drugs? Look at the tobacco industy and growers, forced by judges to pay tens of billions in settlements over decades.

And now you want Phillip Morris to grow hashish and coca plants. I see lawyers eyes glaze over at the possibilites now.

"So, your company makes crack?" "Yes, and if next quarter is favorable, we're branching out into PCP and Crystal Meth"

You may eventually decriminalize some aspects, but it will never be manufactured and taxed.
 
How are you going to "commercialize" drugs? Look at the tobacco industy and growers, forced by judges to pay tens of billions in settlements over decades.

And now you want Phillip Morris to grow hashish and coca plants. I see lawyers eyes glaze over at the possibilites now.

"So, your company makes crack?" "Yes, and if next quarter is favorable, we're branching out into PCP and Crystal Meth"

You may eventually decriminalize some aspects, but it will never be manufactured and taxed.

No, I don't want Philip Morris to grow and market it, but if they or anybody else decides that it would be profitable to do so, then is trying (or pretending) to stop them worth the corruption of police forces and the judicial system that took place during prohibition and is taking place all over again? Is it worth the thousands of youth whose lives are ruined when they're lured out of school and legitimate careers by the chance at huge money right now? Is it worth the thousands of people killed by drug gangs, police and judges (e.g., Peter McWilliams)? Could any realistic outcome of complete legalization be one tenth as bad as what we've got now?

Ken
 
IF drugs were to become legal...WHO are we going to trust with over seeing it ATF&E...OH sorry that would be ATFED..ya they are GREAT people...!!![smile] [crying] [crying]

ILLEGAL DRUGS...I don't do them..let other if they may!

You come through my door you better be yelling LOUD and CLEAR....[thinking]
I feel sorry for a large group of people who made some REALLY bad choices in Atl.....[sad2]
 
Last edited:
If you're strongly opposed to (currently) illegal drugs, consider this: It's generally recognized that more people drank during prohibition than did before and that they drank significantly more. Don't assume that people who advocate legalization are "in favor of drugs"; they may be more opposed than you are, but looking for a solution based on a more rational, rather than an emotional consideration of the problem. Simply assuming that the best way to reduce drug abuse is to criminalize use is a lot like assuming that the best way to reduce violence is to outlaw guns.

Ken
 
I advocate legalization but am against drugs. I don't use them now and wouldn't use them if they were legal. But as Ken notes, I would prefer a world with legal drugs than a world with a war on drugs being waged on every urban street corner. The benefits of criminalization just don't outweigh the problems: violence, crime & corruption.

Education is the solution, not criminalization. We need to stop protecting people from themselves, educate them, and expect that they will behave like adults.
 
+ 1
If you're strongly opposed to (currently) illegal drugs, consider this: It's generally recognized that more people drank during prohibition than did before and that they drank significantly more. Don't assume that people who advocate legalization are "in favor of drugs"; they may be more opposed than you are, but looking for a solution based on a more rational, rather than an emotional consideration of the problem. Simply assuming that the best way to reduce drug abuse is to criminalize use is a lot like assuming that the best way to reduce violence is to outlaw guns.

Ken
 
Found an update on this case. They were playing Tesler's trial on CourtTV/TruTV today and reminded me of it.

Link to article

Atlanta Journal Constitution said:
Ex-cop not guilty in fatal shooting
Tesler was found guilty of lying to investigators

By STEVE VISSER
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 05/20/08

Arthur Bruce Tesler's acquittal on two of three charges Tuesday may have spared him a long prison term for his role in the killing of a 92-year-old woman — but a spectator at his trial said the Almighty would have the last word.

"I put it all in God's hands," said Esther Woltz as she waited on the Fulton County jury's verdict for the Atlanta police detective.

The jury acquitted Tesler on two charges from the illegal 2006 narcotics raid in which officers shot and killed Kathryn Johnston in her northwest Atlanta home. It found him guilty of lying in an official investigation in the cover-up of police wrongdoing that followed the shooting.

"It is not like anyone intended to hurt her, but that's what came out of it," Woltz said. "Right will win out."

Tesler, 42, faces up to five years in prison when sentenced Thursday. If he had been convicted on all counts, he could have been sentenced to 20 years in prison.

The verdict came shortly after the jury reviewed a transcript of Tesler's defense testimony. He and his two partners were accused of lying to get the no-knock search warrant for Johnston's home on the mistaken belief it was the house of a drug dealer.

The Johnston killing shocked metro Atlanta and enraged many in the African-American community, who complained that shoddy or heavy-handed police work in the war on drugs was a source of repeated abuses.

After the verdict, state Sen. Vincent Fort (D-Atlanta) struggled to contain his anger. He contended Tesler — who was not charged with homicide — was as responsible for Johnston's death as his two partners, who both pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter.

"He has much blood on his hands, and he is now in custody where he ought to be," Fort said. "No matter how much time he spends in jail, he will have to live with himself."

Tesler's family declined to comment after the verdict.

Jury foreman Steve Burrows said jurors had worked diligently to reach verdicts on all three counts since Thursday, when they received the case.

"We were a panel of people who worked very hard to come to consensus," he said.

Tesler was charged with violating his oath of office, lying in an official investigation and falsely imprisoning Johnston, who was shot in her home after she fired a revolver at plainclothes officers as they burst into the house on Nov. 21, 2006.

His two partners, Gregg Junnier and Jason R. Smith, who were charged with murder in the case, pleaded guilty earlier to voluntary manslaughter and to federal civil rights violations. Unlike Smith and Junnier, Tesler was stationed at the rear of the house. Tesler testified that he fired no shots. Junnier and Smith, who entered plea bargains, face up to 10 and 12 years, respectively, on the state charges and on federal civil rights violations.

Tesler testified he did not know that Smith lied to a judge to get a no-knock search warrant for the house on Neal Street. The detectives said they had been told a kilo of cocaine was hidden in the house.

Instead, Smith planted drugs in the house after the officers killed Johnston, according to testimony.

Tesler, a new officer in the narcotics division, testified he participated in the cover-up of the illegal warrant because he feared for his safety from his partners and he feared being labeled a "rat" if he informed on them.

Tesler's lawyer, William McKenney, acknowledged the jury would have had trouble acquitting his client of charges he lied in an official investigation because Tesler had told the FBI an elaborate cover story in a taped interview.

"We admitted he did not tell the truth to the FBI," McKenney said. "The issue was whether they felt he was coerced into making a false statement."

The Rev. Markel Hutchins, who pushed for a federal investigation of the killing, said even the partial victory was distinctive because the jurors had decided to hold a police officer accountable.

"Police officers are typically not convicted by juries even when they kill innocent people," Hutchins said. "So we think this is some measure of justice."

District Attorney Paul Howard said the verdict showed the community wouldn't overlook police wrongdoing and expected police officers to follow the law when enforcing it.

"One of the things we hope that people in the community realize is that it doesn't make a difference if you commit a crime in Fulton County — whether you are a police officer or a citizen — you will be held accountable," Howard said.

Some Neal Street residents near Johnston's house expressed outrage at the verdict.

"There's a lot of people down here who have lost their respect for the police," said Marie Thomas, 36. "This verdict is a slap in the face. If they're going to get away with it this time, they'll do it again."

Police Chief Richard Pennington responded to the verdict at news conference announcing results of the new narcotics unit's first major operation since it was disbanded and rebuilt after the Johnston shooting.

"I think the jury has spoken," Pennington said. "He [Tesler] has been given an opportunity to go before his peers, in terms of a trial by jury."

Pennington said police had prepared for any outbreak of "civil unrest" that might erupt because of anger at the verdict. There appeared to be a heavy police presence in the Neal Street neighborhood Tuesday evening.

Pennington's absence at the trial was noted by spectators. "I'm surprised Pennington isn't here," Woltz said.

Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin was at a conference in Las Vegas on Tuesday and could not be reached for comment.

Hutchins, a spokesman for Johnston's family, said Atlanta has a better Police Department because of the case. He contended no-knock warrants aren't being issued so easily and that supervisors are being scrutinized to ensure they followed policies.

He said the superiors of the three officers also should have been held accountable. He noted testimony in the trial from Junnier, Tesler's partner, that the head of the narcotics division adopted a see-no-evil, hear-no-evil approach to supervision and the sergeant over the unit told the three men to adopt a story and stick to it after the botched raid.

"We will continue to push for criminal prosecution for those who turn their heads," he said. "We certainly hope that this is not over."

Lou Arcangeli, a former APD deputy chief, blamed the department for allowing lax or conniving supervisors for creating a culture where officers felt free to circumvent the law.

He said Johnston's death could have been avoided if the department had demanded that officers followed strict procedures in making arrests rather than reaching monthly arrest quotas. "Tesler has my sympathy, but he made some bad choices," said Arcangeli, who watched the verdict. "If he had a tough sergeant, would any of this have happened?"

Sgt. Scott Kreher, a police union leader, said the department has been waiting for the criminal case to be over to launch its internal investigation of supervisor culpability.

"Of course the administrative charges haven't been brought yet," Kreher said. "It will be interesting to see where those charges go."
 
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7005600271

92-Year-Old Woman Shot Dead By Police After She Opens Fire

November 22, 2006 6:52 a.m. EST

Nidhi Sharma - All Headline News Staff Writer

Atlanta, GA (AHN) - A 92-year-old woman in northwest Atlanta injured three narcotic police officers after she opened fire on them as they forced their way through a door while serving a warrant at a house in northwest Atlanta. In defense, the officers shot and killed the old woman identified as Kathryn Johnston.

According to neighbors and relatives, this must be a case of mistaken identity but police insist that Johnston was the only resident in the house at the time and had lived in the home for about 17 years.

Assistant Chief Alan Dreher told AP that the officers had a legal warrant and "knocked and announced" before they forced open the door. He also supported the officers' move to shoot the woman in return.

The three plainclothes Atlanta police officers are currently undergoing treatment at Grady Memorial Hospital. According to police, one was hit in the arm, another in a thigh and the third in a shoulder, and all three were conscious and alert.

Describing the incident, Officer Joe Cobb, a police spokesman said a woman inside started shooting the moment they approached the house about 7 pm. The officers just returned fire.

WAGA-TV said that Sarah Dozier, a niece of the woman denied any presence of drugs at the house.

"My aunt was in good health. I'm sure she panicked when they kicked that door down," Dozier said. "There was no reason they had to go in there and shoot her down like a dog."

If the police can't even keep to a single story, how can they expect us to believe it? First of all, plainclothes cops executing a search warrant? If the police are executing a warrant, shouldn't they be doing everything possible to make sure it's known that they are police, including being fully uniformed? That's a bad decision on the part of the supervising officer to allow at least three plainclothes officers to execute a search warrant. Otherwise, what's to keep anyone from claiming to be a plainclothes cop executing a warrant, in order to gain unlawful access to your house?

Second, did the old lady shoot as the officers approached the house or did the officers "knock and announce" before kicking in the door, prompting the lady to open fire? I don't think the officers would knock and announce after being fired upon, so I'm guessing she didn't open fire as they approached the house.

From the way the story is written, the cops definately made a grave mistake and should be dealt with accordingly. Since Chief Dreher and Officer Cobb can't even give the same account of events, the police are lying to cover something up.
 
Pete, that article is full of what is now known to be wrong information. If you look at the article I posted one of the big issues about this case is the cover up after the fact. They lied to get the warrant and then planted drugs in the house after she was dead in an attempt to make the raid look "good". Also it was determined from what I saw on TruTV she only fired one shot. How she got 3 of them with one shot was not explained in the short bit of testimony I saw before I fell asleep. Another thing that was mentioned on TV is that Tesler tried to pay a man to lie and say he was the one that told Tesler that there were drugs in Johnston's house. Tesler never explained(anywhere I have seen anyway) what really lead him and his partners to believe that there were drugs in the house.

Now maybe one of the lawyers on the board could explain this to me as I don't understand why the charges seemed so minor. From what I have seen they executed an illegally obtained warrant making that raid a crime. The prosecutor said as much in the bot I saw on TruTV. If the raid was then illegal wouldn't that make their entry into the house a home invasion type crime and a felony? If the raid is now a felony and someone was killed/murdered as a result isn't that capitol murder? Why weren't these cops all charged with capitol murder? Is there a missing(or extremely weak) link in my logic chain or could it be that the prosecution didn't think they had a chance of getting cops convicted of capitol murder under these circumstances?
 
"knocked and announced" before they forced open the door. She is 90 what speek up sunny I cant hear you!!! My grandparents late 80's and thet cant hear the phone ringing in the same room. Are you kidding me?
 
From the way the story is written, the cops definately made a grave mistake and should be dealt with accordingly. Since Chief Dreher and Officer Cobb can't even give the same account of events, the police are lying to cover something up.

Not to be rude..but where have you been?

The cops have all been convicted of crimes and going to jail.

The Narcotics unit was disbanded and the Department has been turned completely upside down because of this incident.

It is no secret that there were lies to cover things up.
 
"knocked and announced" before they forced open the door. She is 90 what speek up sunny I cant hear you!!! My grandparents late 80's and thet cant hear the phone ringing in the same room. Are you kidding me?


You are missing the point....they did not know it was the home of a 90 year old!!!!!
 
i m saying that that a properly trained force might have handled that differently. Obviously, this 92 year old woman was not a drug dealer, so the whole warrant issuing process is highly suspect. Arriving in plain clothes in a high crime area contributed to the woman being fearful of her life. And once shots were fired, instead of spraying the house with bullets, they might have been able to stand off, get some family member to talk to her to diffuse the situation, etc.

But if your training is to "spray" the residence with every cartridge you have, and "pray" the perp is hit, then you get results like this.

Weren't we having this same conversation a week ago, about the officer who shot his own reflection in the mirror? Once again, where is the training?
 
i m saying that that a properly trained force might have handled that differently. Obviously, this 92 year old woman was not a drug dealer, so the whole warrant issuing process is highly suspect. Arriving in plain clothes in a high crime area contributed to the woman being fearful of her life. And once shots were fired, instead of spraying the house with bullets, they might have been able to stand off, get some family member to talk to her to diffuse the situation, etc.

But if your training is to "spray" the residence with every cartridge you have, and "pray" the perp is hit, then you get results like this.

Weren't we having this same conversation a week ago, about the officer who shot his own reflection in the mirror? Once again, where is the training?



Do you know what happened here?

Training had nothing to do with this. Criminal acts on the part of the Detectives did. You cannot hold this incident as an example or basis for anything. The cops lied to get the warrant and then executed the warrant poorly and lied to cover it up after planting evidence.

There is nothing to discuss except for which prisons to send them too!!
 
Last edited:
Because currently drugs are illegal, and the people who make their living manufacturing, and selling drugs are a danger to their immediate surroundings. Also it is outrageous to expect the police to deal with these people by sending 2 patrol officers to knock on the front door, like they were responding to a routine call.

Sorry, I'm calling bullshit on this one.

I've been on literally a few HUNDRED ride-alongs and also been present at dozens of search warrant executions, both the "no-knock" and the traditional variety. I'll bet you $100 this wasn't a standard knock on the door, present the warrant and search type.

I'm a total supporter of the police. They should reasonably expect to go home safely every night.

BUT...

The attitude adopted by cops over the last 10 years is that they will accept ZERO risk. That's bullshit. It's a dangerous job and should get more pay and respect than it does. But NO ONE gets to act like the Freakin Gestapo on the off-chance that MAYBE they will face danger.

90% of the no-knock warrants are not needed. there aren't one in 50 drug dealers that will shoot at a cop. Even the most stupid felon on earth knows that killing a cop will get you the chair.

I'm really sick of police, who genuinely ARE there to help, being turned into stormtroopers by overzealous training and scare tactics.

This crap is the most immediate and serious threat to our rights in existence and hardly anyone has the moxie to call it like it is.

COPS: You have a valuable, honorable, important profession. But it IS NOT guaranteed to be safe. If you can't deal with that without becoming a jack-booted thug, go get another job.

And for the Thug variety of pol icing's civilian defenders, stop being sissies. The drugs aren't half as dangerous as the assault on our rights.
 
If you're not breaking the law then you have nothing to worry about. The police make a mistake and nobody is hur then no harm no foul. They can raid my house whenever...I have absolutely NOTHING to hide!!!

Nice. Then you'll have no problems if we just dispose of that pesky 4th Amendment to the Constitution. Would you feel the same way of they came to take your guns?

This isn't about being anti-cop. You'll find no better friend to the police than yours truly. It's about stopping police from becoming a Gestapo unit enforcing insane laws with far more force than is warranted. Most cops I know (and it's quite a lot) agree.
 
This is not the cops fault and also is not the old womens fault. She opened fire on the cops what were they supposed to do. Not only did she fire on them, she shot each one once. It really is too bad.
 
The cops certainly didn't intend to shoot an innocent 92 year old woman, but their coverups and lies are most certainly their fault.
 
"So why are the cops raiding people's freaking houses looking for drugs in the first place? It's WRONG for them to be doing that! Stop the raids now!"

I don't understand this comment. Are you saying that the drug dealers should be free to conduct their trade in peace without fear of arrest?

...if we were still using the 9th ammendment. The war on drugs is the biggest fraud (well, was up until the 8 trillion dollar dailout)
 
Not to be rude..but where have you been?

The cops have all been convicted of crimes and going to jail.

The Narcotics unit was disbanded and the Department has been turned completely upside down because of this incident.

It is no secret that there were lies to cover things up.

cops lie? [thinking]
 
Back
Top Bottom