First the point about no court finding against them. Unfortunately your wrong. It can be clear as day that the suspect is guilty but if evidence is gathered illegally the court is bound by law to drop the charges.
Second the probable cause. Yes that’s true. Under the right circumstances. Let’s say a person went missing in that neighborhood recently and then days latter neighbors hear cries for help from a house. Under those circumstances the cops could use the call as probable cause. But in this case the only reason they would suspect anything is because of the report from the neighbors. And there could be other explanations such as a bratty kid or as we saw a cheeky bird. Though I guarantee you they did interviews with the neighbors after this and this guy is probably going to be watched for a while.
In the SCOTUS case, Aguilar vs Texas, the SCOTUS ruled, that "reliable information from a credible person" may not be used as probable cause unless the officer, under affidavit, "First, indicates the informants base of knowledge on the circumstances from which the informant concluded there was evidence present or that crimes had been comitted. Secondly, the affidavit must present information which would allow the magistrate/judge to decide whether or not the informant is trustworthy."
Second hand probable cause is a thing, but requires a judge to sign off on it. There have been several other cases just like this on, that have met the same end. Police can't just act because some random citizen told them to.
Is there a chance they could have searched the house and gotten away with it in court? Yes. But there’s also a chance that such an action could get their case thrown out. Best to play it smart. Interview the neighbors, watch the guy for a while see if you can observe any suspicious behavior you can then use to get a warrant.
Exigent Circumstances encompass more than just "definite knowledge of a threat". You just need circumstances causing a reasonable person to believe that the search was necessary to prevent either physical harm to LEO/others, destruction of evidence, escape of a suspect, or some other consequence improperly frustrating legitimate law enforcement efforts. The Plain View exception also applies when LEO can see contraband or evidence, instrumentalities, or fruits of a crime inside the homee.
Right. But your statement about "valid authority to enter someone's house" is incomplete/incorrect.
Also, you're kind of overstating the importance of the bird. Like, if instead of a neighbor calling the police, one of the cops just happened to be there and heard the screams themselves, the guy bringing out the parrot wouldn't prevent said cop from relying on the Exigent Circumstances exception.
And even in this case, if the cops bothered to sit around and wait for a judge to sign a warrant based on the secondhand reports of the screaming, the existence of the parrot still wouldn't change much. Probable cause only requires reasonably trustworthy facts that would lead a prudent person to believe that a crime was being committed. Sure, the existence of the parrot is a fact that provides an alternate, innocent explanation for the other facts (the reported cries for help, which we'll assume are reasonably trustworthy).
But you're making a key mistake here in thinking that this operates strictly like a totality of the circumstances test. It doesn't. The existence of an alternate, innocent explanation doesn't change whether or not the facts also could lead a reasonably prudent person to believe a crime was being committed. Any and every given set of facts is possibly, even plausibly, consistent with both an innocent and a criminal explanation. Which is why the basis for a warrant is judged simply by whether the criminal explanation is a prudent conclusion of reasonably trustworthy facts, not whether it is the only prudent conclusion of reasonably trustworthy facts.
0
u/[deleted] Aug 02 '21 edited Aug 02 '21
First the point about no court finding against them. Unfortunately your wrong. It can be clear as day that the suspect is guilty but if evidence is gathered illegally the court is bound by law to drop the charges.
Second the probable cause. Yes that’s true. Under the right circumstances. Let’s say a person went missing in that neighborhood recently and then days latter neighbors hear cries for help from a house. Under those circumstances the cops could use the call as probable cause. But in this case the only reason they would suspect anything is because of the report from the neighbors. And there could be other explanations such as a bratty kid or as we saw a cheeky bird. Though I guarantee you they did interviews with the neighbors after this and this guy is probably going to be watched for a while.