Lawyers interfering with law enforcement

[Dredd]

Police ‘Badger Stops’ Challenged In Indiana « CBS Chicago – Breaking News, Sports, Weather, Traffic, and the Best of Chicago

This kind of stuff really grinds my gears. An officer found 2380 grams of narcotics in some druggie van and now the punk's lawyer says the search was "illegal." What ever! He caught the guy, what more can you ask for. 2 kilos of cocaine is a good bust. But up in porter county that might not be out of the ordinary. I think if you catch the right guy then they should punish him and not dwell on the details.

 

[eatsnopaste]

So when you get pulled over and the cop wants to do a full cavity search, you're ok with that because you don't have anything to hide? If the cop checks enough people he will eventually find someone with something "up there"! Come on, finding something because of a good stop and search is one thing...fishing is another.

 

[Hawkeye]

Its almost certainly unconstitutional. If its a pattern as described in the article, then there is clearly an abusive situation going on in NWI. The ends don't always justify the means.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Its almost certainly unconstitutional. If its a pattern as described in the article, then there is clearly an abusive situation going on in NWI. The ends don't always justify the means.

It's not unconstitutional if the LEO gets permission to search the vehicle from the operator, It doesn't make the search right. But it's not inconstitutional.

Learn to say no. Or in the alternative don't drive around with two kilos of cocaine.

 

[Bunnykid68]

The officers should definitely make people aware of their rights before they try to violate them.

 

[snapping turtle]

Lawyers interfering with law enforcement

Is that not what they are paid to do. Maybe not.

 

[Ashkelon]

It is profiling. The lawyers are not interfering. The lawyer is merely trying to clarify the legality of a good stop and subsequent search from merely pulling people over and tossing their cars for no reason. This clarification will benefit the general public and outweigh the benefits gained from over zealous law enforcement.
Unfortunately, the general citizenry lacks a fundamental understanding of their rights. We live in a State where by and large children are taught to comply with any officer request. As those children mature into adults they invariably say "Sure, you can search my car". Not knowing they have a choice. Often the question isn't phrased in a manner that implies choice. Tone, inflection, and body mannerisms means more than word choice.
It is our right to be free from harassment not the right of law enforcement to speculate and curtail our freedoms and movement.
Just because I happen to be a middle aged white guy that drives pick up trucks doesn't mean I can't empathize with socio demographic that is traditionally pulled over in these types of stops. Besides who will stand for me when the time comes if we allow unreasonable violations of persons?

 

[John Galt]

Police ‘Badger Stops’ Challenged In Indiana « CBS Chicago – Breaking News, Sports, Weather, Traffic, and the Best of Chicago

This kind of stuff really grinds my gears. An officer found 2380 grams of narcotics in some druggie van and now the punk's lawyer says the search was "illegal." What ever! He caught the guy, what more can you ask for. 2 kilos of cocaine is a good bust. But up in porter county that might not be out of the ordinary. I think if you catch the right guy then they should punish him and not dwell on the details.

Seriously? Details? Seriously? Dredd, with all due respect, I'm beginning to think that you are either a troll or a cop that needs to re-evaluate your dedication to upholding the CONSTITUTION. You sound like a defense attorney's wet dream with your talk of "details" and are a lawsuit waiting to happen! Those pesky little "details" are the very things the FF fought so hard for to protect us from an infringing, over-reaching government. What you may refer to as "details" I refer to as "rights". I AM NOT ADVOCATING violence or letting bad guys roam unchecked, BUT we have to keep an eye out for something even more insidious and that is government trampling our rights "for our good", as we know where that leads.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

His report mentions pine tree air fresheners and fabric sheets in the van and states she sprayed perfume when he stopped her, all presumably to hide the scent of drugs.

The smell tipped him off?

I thought police couldn't smell.

 

[Eddie]

Police ‘Badger Stops’ Challenged In Indiana « CBS Chicago – Breaking News, Sports, Weather, Traffic, and the Best of Chicago

This kind of stuff really grinds my gears. An officer found 2380 grams of narcotics in some druggie van and now the punk's lawyer says the search was "illegal." What ever! He caught the guy, what more can you ask for. 2 kilos of cocaine is a good bust. But up in porter county that might not be out of the ordinary. I think if you catch the right guy then they should punish him and not dwell on the details.

A search cannot be self justifying. In other words, if a search is done illegally, the fact that it turns up contraband cannot be used to justify the search. Otherwise there would be no reason to follow the Constitution; officers could search anything and everything and justify their searches based on what they find.

Traffic stop consent searches are weird animals. The driver is not free to leave. They have been pulled over and fleeing in their vehicle would be a felony. The officer that pulled them over has the ability to write them an expensive ticket or let them go with a warning. These factors put enormous pressure on the driver to consent.

The article is bare on details but it seems to hint that the officer in question pulls people over all shift long and asks them for permission to search their vehicles. It did not mention any other observations that would support searching the vehicle.

As far as the argument that if you have nothing to hide why not consent? It is possible that she did not know that there was contraband in her vehicle. She may have been a dupe being used by a dealer so she might not have been aware of the consequences of consenting.

As to the comment about lawyers interfereing with police work, why is it that every time a cop gets charged with a crime the first thing they do is lawyer up and plead not guilty?

 

[hornadylnl]

As to the comment about lawyers interfereing with police work, why is it that every time a cop gets charged with a crime the first thing they do is lawyer up and plead not guilty?

Because there are 2 different justice systems. One for the peasants and one for the kings men.

 

[grimor]

repeat after me "I do not give consent for you to search my vehicle or my person, but I will not hinder you if you have a legal reason to do so"

 

[Leadeye]

Stopping badgers can be tough, they are bad tempered and bite.

 

[ATM]

repeat after me "I do not give consent for you to search my vehicle or my person, but I will not hinder you if you have a legal reason to do so"

How about just "NO."

Simple and easy to remember.

If they're asking your permission, it's because they don't have a legal reason to do so otherwise.

 

[grimor]

How about just "NO."

Simple and easy to remember.

If they're asking your permission, it's because they don't have a legal reason to do so otherwise.

No? but that means you have something to hide and is enough probably cause to get a warrant. Obviously you're guilty if you don't consent.

 

[ATM]

We're all guilty of something. I'll be guilty of being succinct.

 

[Pocketman]

-1 for the OP with the appropriate name

 

[Kirk Freeman]

So, you think the cops are using badgers to smell for drugs?

No drugs have been recovered but lots of illegal voles, moles, snakes, grubs and earthworms have been found.

 

[ATM]

moles

Moles have no rights.

I hates me some moles.

 

[littletommy]

Is a Badger and a Wolverine the same thing?