Warrantless search - Rogers County

[CanadianRiverRat]

Oh yeah, a life lesson....if you're on a ship sinking in shark infested waters, surround yourself with all available attorneys. They leave such a bad taste in your mouth....even sharks won't bite 'em!

 

[tweetr]

I'm curious how long it took to reassemble the car your son was driving after it was "torn apart" by the officers?

I'll try to let you know when it's done. Clock still running on that one. Work and all.

 

[CanadianRiverRat]

Ehhhhhh ... It's OSA. We have a love affair with the words "Yeah, well what if ...??" And look how much more info has come out about the stop (and actions after) since the original post. Paul Harvey was right about "the rest of the story". Biden will do ... Or say ... something stupid and we will move on shortly.

THAT Gurl, that reminds me when some of us kids were arguing and one popped off "well what if a frog had wings?" Grandpa raised his head up from the tractor he was fixing and said "The damn frog would get his nuts up outta the sand, and go do something CONSTRUCTIVE!"
Most days it wasn't hard to get on Grandpa's last nerve lol!

 

[Snattlerake]

So I would like to have you help me with your experience to understand the main problem I have here. I don't want to get into the debate about the legitimacy of the stop. The one thing that bothers me about the scenario is the appropriateness of the person being stopped being place in handcuffs and locked in the patrol car prior to the establishment that any actual offense has taken place. This doesn't seem normal to me. Forgive me because I don't know your particular circumstance, but if you have one, would you be okay with your wife, daughter, or mother being treated in this same manner? Maybe this is the only safe way to conduct a vehicle search when your are the only officer on the scene without having to keep an eye on the suspect while doing the search. But in this case it sounds like he had called for backup and was expecting other officers to arrive on the scene. It seems to me that the appropriate course of action would have had the driver remain in the car until backup arrived. Then one of the other officers could have taken the driver back by his car and continue to talk with him while the search was done. If nothing is found and and the officer talking with the driver had no reason to believe he was in any way impaired to drive the he be allowed to leave and go on about his own business.

Someone's wife , sister, mother. in OKLAHOMA!



Sir, the offense for all intents and purposes had already taken place. It was the dog's reaction that was the probable cause for the search. The search was for the evidence the dog hit on. which was either non existant any longer or so minuscule it was not found and would not be worth any evidentiary value in court which seems to be the case here.

The deputies offering to "drop charges" could have been a lie because we can lie to suspects just like congress can lie to us. Probably more of a move to save the dog's face and hit/miss ratio putting the onus on the deputies that couldn't find the source of the hit.

NO ONE went in my back seat without handcuffs and the seat belt ran through their belt, cuffs, or belt loop if they had any attitude whatsoever. I went home at the end of my shift.

 

[kingfish]

Someone's wife , sister, mother. in OKLAHOMA!



Sir, the offense for all intents and purposes had already taken place. It was the dog's reaction that was the probable cause for the search. The search was for the evidence the dog hit on. which was either non existant any longer or so minuscule it was not found and would not be worth any evidentiary value in court which seems to be the case here.

The deputies offering to "drop charges" could have been a lie because we can lie to suspects just like congress can lie to us. Probably more of a move to save the dog's face and hit/miss ratio putting the onus on the deputies that couldn't find the source of the hit.

NO ONE went in my back seat without handcuffs and the seat belt ran through their belt, cuffs, or belt loop if they had any attitude whatsoever. I went home at the end of my shift.

Glad you always made it home to your family. Glad I never crossed paths with you.

 

[Snattlerake]

The 4th Amendment states searches won't be "unreasonable". I know the intent of the 4th Amendment, I've received many, many hours of training on the 4th Amendment, and I've conducted many, many searches and seizures with respect to 4th Amendment protections of citizens. I have never had evidence dismissed or a case dismissed based on any 4th Amendment questions. Almost everything police officers do, in one way or another, hinges on what's reasonable based on court rules, totality of the circumstances, precedent, etc. There is a tremendous amount of case law that's shaped the way officers are allowed to conduct searches/seizures, with and without warrants.

So, yeah... It is worth examining. You should try it rather than just quoting the Amendment. You should educate yourself on what's lawful under the 4th Amendment and what's not. You should learn about things like when a warrantless search is permissible. You should learn about things like "expectation of privacy" and how your location affects that.

There's a lot more to understanding the 4th Amendment than just quoting the text.

And the Exclusionary rule according to evidence involving exigent circumstances backed up with case law after case law ad infinitum ad nauseam. My degree was Law Enforcement not just Criminal Justice.

 

[OK Corgi Rancher]

I'll try to let you know when it's done. Clock still running on that one. Work and all.

I'd like to see some photos of this car that was "torn apart". I suspect our definitions of that would be worlds apart.

Also...I'll ask again: do you believe there should never be a search/seizure without a warrant?

 

[tweetr]

I'd like to see some photos of this car that was "torn apart". I suspect our definitions of that would be worlds apart.

Also...I'll ask again: do you believe there should never be a search/seizure without a warrant?

Well, that's an interesting question. What does it say? How do you read it?

Begin with this: what is the fundamental right guaranteed (not conferred) by the Fourth Amendment? What is its essence?

 

[El Pablo]

I'd like to see some photos of this car that was "torn apart". I suspect our definitions of that would be worlds apart.

Also...I'll ask again: do you believe there should never be a search/seizure without a warrant?

you may find this more productive:

 

[Snattlerake]

Glad you always made it home to your family. Glad I never crossed paths with you.

Thanks! You might have and not known it.