The police chief of a small Kansas town was placed on suspension Thursday after his department conducted a controversial raid on a local newspaper last month which sparked criticism from press advocates over whether it violated First Amendment rights.
Marion Police Chief Gideon Cody’s suspension was reported Friday by the Marion County Record, the same newspaper that was raided. Marion Mayor Brogan Jones confirmed the suspension to the Associated Press on Saturday.
Full story: Kansas police chief suspended in wake of police raid on local newspaper – CBS News
As I was reading this article, the only question I asked myself was, “Do police do any research before they decide to go into something head first? The problem was that there was a newspaper allegedly getting illegal drunk driving information for a story they published. There is also evidence that a search warrant was not even approved, because the probable cause documents were not filed until three days after they had done their ‘legal’ search. The police have stormed the newspaper, seizing cell phones, computers, and documents. The serious part about this though, is that they stormed the co-owners home, a 98 year old woman. The day after the raid was conducted, she died.
Where is the miscommunication happening in these types of situations? Is it a thing of miscommunication or is it a thing of police officers jumping headfirst into a situation that they deem less than delicate, with a plan of using force and their authority? The probable cause affidavits being filed *three days* after the search was executed are more than suspicious. What made them think that they could act without the affidavits being officially filed in the state court, therefore, resulting in the search warrant not being approved in time for the actual search?
I wouldn’t be surprised if this was a case of noble corruption, where the police believed that the end would justify the means. It’s happened before, it’ll happen again.
Hi Jirah, I think that there is a lot of miscommunication between officers, and this was a result of that. While there was a search warrant obtained by the officers, it was gotten the day of, we wonder why it wasn’t sooner, what caused this rush? I wonder how they got this warrant in the first place, I know its by a judge but how with what little evidence they had? They deemed that there was insufficient evidence for this search to even happen and made the officers return the evidence they had collected. While officers want to solve crime, they need to follow the rules and procedures so that these types of situations can stop happening.
Hi Jirah, in terms of miscommunication I think a majority of it is the police officers along with them wanting to act first and ask questions later. Although they did have the warrant on the day of the search, the question becomes what basis did the judge have to sign off, as the affidavits were not officially filed until after the search. When this happens do you question the judge or the officers, who becomes at fault for this “illegal search”. I think this was a case of many moving parts, moving too quickly; resulting in ineffective policing, as they had to return all seized evidence.
Why do officers not fact check before deciding to do something as invasive as a raid? If officers would have tried getting some background information and waited for actual evidence before raiding this local newspaper printer, then none of these problems would have happened. In addition the public might have more trust in the police than they do right now. Another thing is why was the search warrant approved three days after the search was done. Does this not make it an illegal search? I feel as though they don’t think things through before doing them; they just jump the gun and do things such as this raid in the heat of the moment. Free speech and press are very important to American citizens. Why would the police not move forward with things properly? They had to have known what they were doing would end up in the news.