Deanimator
Member
As is imputing ones own long history of misbehavior to others.
Terry stops..........
- Thread starter waldonbuddy
- Start date
- Status
Deanimator
Member
I bring one set of laws for everyone.
If I'd done what Weems did, I'd be in prison, and deservedly so.
zxcvbob
Member
The car is not being towed to conduct an illegal search, the car is being towed to punish the owner for not submitting to a voluntary search. (it will be searched, but the admissibility of whatever might be found is pretty low on the priority list at this point.) The cop can avoid any trouble by claiming "public safety" -- the vehicle was not roadworthy because the license plate light was out, or he suspected the driver was DUI.
cassandrasdaddy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,206
The car is not being towed to conduct an illegal search, the car is being towed to punish the owner for not submitting to a voluntary search. (it will be searched, but the admissibility of whatever might be found is pretty low on the priority list at this point.) The cop can avoid any trouble by claiming "public safety" -- the vehicle was not roadworthy because the license plate light was out, or he suspected the driver was DUi
this instance.... where did it happen? and in your imagination does not count
this instance.... where did it happen? and in your imagination does not count
I can't take the blatant ignorance
Deanimator
Member
However, the person postulating this set of events wasn't willing to state an actual justification for towing the car. That means no justification.
waldonbuddy
member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2009
- Messages
- 167
Thanks for all of the advise.
I won't file any complaint on this as I just wanted to know a few things for possible future events.
As for playing the game? To what I was referring to was what Zoogster pointed out which is when the police get behind you {as I was the only one on the road at the current time, and it wasn't in a bad part of town either} they will eventually find something to pull you over for {maybe just me being paranoid}, but I figured by just pulling in to the burger joint I was putting an end to that. Like I said they drove all the way around the block to pull in behind me.
However it bothers me that police can just pull anyone over and pretty much harass as they please. I mean, a guy going to work {and I know the police, when there are two in a patrol unit, already have called in the tag before they pulled me over so they knew I wasn't a criminal} just isn't a bad guy.
As a side note to this, I have observed MANY people pulled over in this city, and being frisk. Upon seeing this I always assumed that something really bad must have happened to have the police frisking a person. Now I know that it doesn't have to be anything more than a traffic stop.
I won't file any complaint on this as I just wanted to know a few things for possible future events.
As for playing the game? To what I was referring to was what Zoogster pointed out which is when the police get behind you {as I was the only one on the road at the current time, and it wasn't in a bad part of town either} they will eventually find something to pull you over for {maybe just me being paranoid}, but I figured by just pulling in to the burger joint I was putting an end to that. Like I said they drove all the way around the block to pull in behind me.
However it bothers me that police can just pull anyone over and pretty much harass as they please. I mean, a guy going to work {and I know the police, when there are two in a patrol unit, already have called in the tag before they pulled me over so they knew I wasn't a criminal} just isn't a bad guy.
As a side note to this, I have observed MANY people pulled over in this city, and being frisk. Upon seeing this I always assumed that something really bad must have happened to have the police frisking a person. Now I know that it doesn't have to be anything more than a traffic stop.
Deanimator
Member
If it's lawful to do so, carry and use a voice recorder. Here in Ohio, you don't need permission or the knowledge of others in a conversation to which you are a party.
It's interesting to see the exercises in "creative writing" that turn up in FOIA requests before the police know you have a verbatim recording. Civil juries love that kind of thing.
zxcvbob
Member
Justification can always be manufactured after-the-fact because the standard is very low, and the potential consequences are almost nonexistent if the justification doesn't hold water. That was the point I was making with my imaginary example.
Deanimator
Member
I'm not sure it's that easy. If you can prove that the LEO lied, he'll get his in the end. It's tough to be a cop if nobody will let you testify to anything because EVERY defense attorney is prepared to impeach your veracity. Word of that kind of thing gets around. My lawyer has a funny story about a cop who didn't know that a "sealed" conviction for perjury isn't REALLY sealed when you're a witness under oath.
Hardballing
Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2010
- Messages
- 29
Sooner or later some officer will Terry Stop some powerful hot shot lawyer and he and his dept will pay in Spades for everyone who has abused this caselaw over the years.
Uh...actually no. Terry has been law of the land since 68 IIRC and the conservative bent of SCOTUS in recent years has tended to expand on it (as many posters here have mentioned).
In short, "the MAN"
can stop you for what he wants to stop you for and can institute at the very minimum a body search. What happens next is up to you as a practical matter. Current SCOTUS has shown scant inclination to second guess the officer at street level. Jes sayin is all.
A question for the original poster. What would have happened if you had just said to the officer, "Excuse me, I am on day one of a brand new job and can't be late, can I leave now so I can get to work on time?"
Just curious if you tried telling them the true circumstance you mentioned here?
Uh...actually no. Terry has been law of the land since 68 IIRC and the conservative bent of SCOTUS in recent years has tended to expand on it (as many posters here have mentioned).
In short, "the MAN"
can stop you for what he wants to stop you for and can institute at the very minimum a body search. What happens next is up to you as a practical matter. Current SCOTUS has shown scant inclination to second guess the officer at street level. Jes sayin is all. A question for the original poster. What would have happened if you had just said to the officer, "Excuse me, I am on day one of a brand new job and can't be late, can I leave now so I can get to work on time?"
Just curious if you tried telling them the true circumstance you mentioned here?
waldonbuddy
member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2009
- Messages
- 167
Well, hypothetically speaking if I told them I would be late for work then THAT would have sounded suspicious, and would have given them even more reason to detain me, IMO.
In other words, they basically stopped me for no real reason so why wouldn't they keep me even longer if I told them I had to leave for whatever reason.
That's just my opinion, as none of the latter happened.
In other words, they basically stopped me for no real reason so why wouldn't they keep me even longer if I told them I had to leave for whatever reason.
That's just my opinion, as none of the latter happened.
mljdeckard
Member
Like Deanimator says;
You can always TRY to manufacture cause after the fact. But remember to get a warrant, you have to tell the judge IN ADVANCE why you want a warrant.
So, let's say you're a cop, and you pull a couple of shenanigans to get a dirty search in, and the judge gives you the benefit of the doubt. Fine. Maybe you get away with it for a while. But sooner or later, judges start to realize which cops will repeatedly have fishy stories for searches, and have numerous complaints against them, and the fun runs out.
And Hardballing, you need to go back and read the whole thread. NO, the police CANNOT stop you for 'what they want' and get at minimum a body search out of anyone they want to. Even if they USED to get away with it all the time, now they have dash cams, (not to mention the cameras everyone has in the phones now,) and lawsuits have forced departments to act in a way that minimizes risk. If there's a cop who keep the chief awake at night wondering what kind of trouble he is going to bail him out of this month, how long do you think that cop lasts?
You can always TRY to manufacture cause after the fact. But remember to get a warrant, you have to tell the judge IN ADVANCE why you want a warrant.
So, let's say you're a cop, and you pull a couple of shenanigans to get a dirty search in, and the judge gives you the benefit of the doubt. Fine. Maybe you get away with it for a while. But sooner or later, judges start to realize which cops will repeatedly have fishy stories for searches, and have numerous complaints against them, and the fun runs out.
And Hardballing, you need to go back and read the whole thread. NO, the police CANNOT stop you for 'what they want' and get at minimum a body search out of anyone they want to. Even if they USED to get away with it all the time, now they have dash cams, (not to mention the cameras everyone has in the phones now,) and lawsuits have forced departments to act in a way that minimizes risk. If there's a cop who keep the chief awake at night wondering what kind of trouble he is going to bail him out of this month, how long do you think that cop lasts?
Flintknapper
Member
beatcop wrote:
The plain truth is: There exists a certain amount of animosity between LEO and many Citizens. Yes, it varies from place to place...but undeniably it exists.
There is a reason for this, no? People do not come down the birth canal with a dislike for cops. Things have changed dramatically since I was kid (I am 55 now). Law enforcement and Society both need to take a big step back and re-evaluate.
Most LEO I know are great people with a tough job to do, but I do see some disturbing trends in their training and general distrust of the citizenry.
Something has gone wrong. The "cops" I knew as a kid were definitely your "friend" and were well respected and liked in the community.
What went wrong???????
The plain truth is: There exists a certain amount of animosity between LEO and many Citizens. Yes, it varies from place to place...but undeniably it exists.
There is a reason for this, no? People do not come down the birth canal with a dislike for cops. Things have changed dramatically since I was kid (I am 55 now). Law enforcement and Society both need to take a big step back and re-evaluate.
Most LEO I know are great people with a tough job to do, but I do see some disturbing trends in their training and general distrust of the citizenry.
Something has gone wrong. The "cops" I knew as a kid were definitely your "friend" and were well respected and liked in the community.
What went wrong???????
rm23
Member
The best thing about the Weems shooting, is that so many higher-ups watched it and confirmed his lie and then you know the chief and the mayor colluded to keep the video a secret.
DT Guy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,847
The issue isn't whether the majority of police (the 'good guys') will do the things we're discussing. The issue for many is that a minority of police officers push things beyond the law's allowance, and often go unpunished for doing so.
When I was a PO, we had an instructor who asked, "What do you call an officer who lies about a search to get a bad guy off the street?"
Some officers actually said, 'a good guy' or 'dedicated.' The correct answer was, "The same thing you call anyone who breaks the law-a criminal."
But the perception that the cop 'doing what it takes' to clean up the streets is pervasive, and reinforced by the rebel hero cops in movies and TV. Few actually make the conceptual leap that these celluloid 'heroes' are actually the basest of criminals-those who employ a badge to violate the law.
Larry
When I was a PO, we had an instructor who asked, "What do you call an officer who lies about a search to get a bad guy off the street?"
Some officers actually said, 'a good guy' or 'dedicated.' The correct answer was, "The same thing you call anyone who breaks the law-a criminal."
But the perception that the cop 'doing what it takes' to clean up the streets is pervasive, and reinforced by the rebel hero cops in movies and TV. Few actually make the conceptual leap that these celluloid 'heroes' are actually the basest of criminals-those who employ a badge to violate the law.
Larry
Buck Snort
Member
The problem here is that when a car is towed and then "searched" what actually happens is that the interior of the car is totally ripped out and in essence the car is destroyed. The cost of having the interior restored to its original condition is prohibitive to most people.
Buck Snort
Member
MLJDekard wrote: "So, let's say you're a cop, and you pull a couple of shenanigans to get a dirty search in, and the judge gives you the benefit of the doubt. Fine. Maybe you get away with it for a while. But sooner or later, judges start to realize which cops will repeatedly have fishy stories for searches, and have numerous complaints against them, and the fun runs out."
Probably so but how many people's lives has this jerk screwed up before the judges finally wise up to his shinnanigins?
Probably so but how many people's lives has this jerk screwed up before the judges finally wise up to his shinnanigins?
mljdeckard
Member
You're always lucky.....until you get caught. No one is saying that this system is perfect. In every game of chance, there is a measure of inevitability.
Sebastian the Ibis
Member
The war on drugs, and the keeping of crime statistics. Politicians and chief's of police like good crime statistics. Which means a high proportion of convictions to crimes. Drug and weapons crimes are the easiest to prosecute. All you need to convict is a cop seeing someone with contraband. No further investigation is necessary. Therefore street cops are encouraged to do as many searches as they can to see contraband. Good citizens become fodder in the search for quick convictions.
Crimes like financial fraud are incredibly hard to investigate and prosecute so they are ignored. Even the Justice Department ignores the big ones until they collapse:Enron, Madoff etc. It is a sliding scale in between. Sometimes cops investigate sometimes they do not. Every craigslist in the country offers illegal services and stolen goods. How many police departments still fingerprint burglary crime scenes? I remember the cops dusting our kitchen 20 years ago. Haven't seen it much recently.
mljdeckard
Member
I'm torn. I want to trust them, but most of the ones I trust are the ones who are older. I WISH I trusted the young enthusiastic ones more.
I mostly blame the litigious society in which we live, where they are too scared to do their freakin' jobs. I recall a cover of Newsweek or Time from about ten years ago, the cover had a picture of a cop, a teacher, and a doctor. The long and short of the article was that we would do society, the courts, and the economy a huge favor if we enacted tort reform to protect teachers from getting sued over b minuses, doctors from getting sued for making an iffy call and having a 90 year-old die, and cops from getting sued for putting the cuffs on too tight. If they could stop worrying about getting sued, they could get back to doing their jobs.
I mostly blame the litigious society in which we live, where they are too scared to do their freakin' jobs. I recall a cover of Newsweek or Time from about ten years ago, the cover had a picture of a cop, a teacher, and a doctor. The long and short of the article was that we would do society, the courts, and the economy a huge favor if we enacted tort reform to protect teachers from getting sued over b minuses, doctors from getting sued for making an iffy call and having a 90 year-old die, and cops from getting sued for putting the cuffs on too tight. If they could stop worrying about getting sued, they could get back to doing their jobs.
Arbor
Member
This isn't a matter of putting the cuffs on too tight- due to the cops negligence and unwillingness to do their jobs right, the OP lost his job. That is not his fault, nor is it his fault if he drives a "suspicious" vehicle. Plenty of us have a beat up car or truck, a rough appearance, or something else that might trigger a cop to single you out as suspicious. But it is not a good enough reason to assume someone is guilty just because of how they look. Police only engage in "profiling" stops because they are never held accountable for damages caused to innocent people and violation of rights.
cassandrasdaddy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,206
due to the cops negligence and unwillingness to do their jobs right,
how do you imagine that?
how do you imagine that?
Sebastian the Ibis
Member
And they are required to prosecute the wrong (i.e. easy to convict) crimes. Traffic stop + search + contraband arrest is as easy as it comes. However, I would much rather that a police officer catches one person stealing a bicycle or writing bad checks than a dozen people arrested for having small amounts of contraband. If politicians would decriminalize the silly stuff we would have officer friendly back.
- Status
