Warrantless search - Rogers County

[CanadianRiverRat]

Sure do, I went to school with his niece. I think he ran into some bad guys and one of them ended his career. (he ended theirs too)

Yep, he got into a gunfight with 2 peckerheads robbing the tag office. Killed one & wounded the other. JB had a "one riot, one ranger" mindset, probably wouldn't got killed if he'd got back up but at that time he was both the chief and the entire catoosa PD.....help was at least 15-20 min away at best. I always got along with him, but then I was just a redneck farm kid and didn't push the "law boundaries" much at all. Had it worked out that way, I'd been proud to back JB up in that fight.

 

[tweetr]

This traffic stop is illustrative, as many of the circumstances parallel the one I described.
Of note is the Detective's remark at 13:48:
"Why do you have, like, this negative view toward the police? What's the deal?"
- He asked of the young man he had just stopped, detained, cuffed, and searched without cause! The arrogance and utter lack of self-awareness are simply stunning.

 

[tweetr]

Whatever you need to tell yoursef, tweetr. Why do you think I was talking about you?

Why do you think I'm talking about you?

 

[OK Corgi Rancher]

Why do you think I'm talking about you?

You see how I quoted your post? And how I'm responding under that quote? That's what your friends in law enforcement would call a "clue" or even "evidence".

I didn't do that. You did. That's the difference.

Why don't you man up, grow a pair, and just answer simple questions when asked instead of responding like a 12 year old? You'd be a lot more credible if you did that.

 

[Chuckie]

Hm. Disagree.

The Fourth Amendment requires specificity in determining "reasonability". A general odor of weed in the wind does not specify a place to be searched.

I too smell weed often, particularly when traveling in California. It is pretty directional in nature. I've never had any trouble locating the source of the skunk smell. As there was no weed in his car, there was no directionality of the odor to lead the deputies to his car.

" The Fourth Amendment requires specificity in determining "reasonability". A general odor of weed in the wind does not specify a place to be searched. "

For some reason you seem to be under the impression that your 'Rights' under our Constitution are protected from being violated. If that were true then law enforcement agencies would not continue to be taken to court and sued month after month, year after year for violation of said 'Rights'.

 

[tweetr]

You see how I quoted your post? And how I'm responding under that quote? That's what your friends in law enforcement would call a "clue" or even "evidence".

I didn't do that. You did. That's the difference.

Why don't you man up, grow a pair, and just answer simple questions when asked instead of responding like a 12 year old? You'd be a lot more credible if you did that.

There you go!
Same reason.
(See? It's not that difficult.)

 

[tweetr]

A quick search returned this article from the Courier-Journal that looks like disposition of the above case. Many of the points leading to a finding of violating the Fourth Amendment parallel the case I described. Expressly including citing "nervousness" as establishing probable cause for a search. And further finding the search of his person for weapons as unjustified, as there was no reasonable suspicion that the young kid might be armed. All very instructive. In this case it certainly helped that the Detective had a body cam recording!

LMPD violated Tae-Ahn Lea's rights in 2018 stop, judge rules

LMPD violated Louisville teen's rights during controversial 2018 traffic stop, judge rules

A judge has ruled an LMPD officer violated a teen Tae-Ahn Lea's constitutional rights by frisking and handcuffing him after a traffic stop in 2018.

www.courier-journal.com

This traffic stop is illustrative, as many of the circumstances parallel the one I described.
Of note is the Detective's remark at 13:48:
"Why do you have, like, this negative view toward the police? What's the deal?"
- He asked of the young man he had just stopped, detained, cuffed, and searched without cause! The arrogance and utter lack of self-awareness are simply stunning.

 

[tweetr]

Federal judge has ‘serious concerns’ about the way Utah trains drug-sniffing police dogs

When Tank, a West Valley City police dog, began sniffing around the silver Mazda Protege during a traffic stop last February, the police officers with him had a hunch that there was drugs in the car.

www.sltrib.com

Do OK dogs have to pass double blind training?

Dunno, still looking into it.
Here is what I'd like to see: run the dog in exactly the same manner on the police car that made the stop, and compare the dog's reaction to the police car with the dog's reaction to the subject car. That would in effect be a control toward establishing legitimate, as opposed to pretextual, probable cause for a search. That would not eliminate signalling of the dog by the handler as a factor, but it would still be instructive.

 

[OK Corgi Rancher]

Interesting how so many think the justice system is corrupt and courts can't be trusted...until a court makes a ruling either favorable to them or in agreement with their opinions.

 

[OK Corgi Rancher]

Pretty much any patrol car I ever drove would get a hit by a dog. Cops frequently transport drugs in their cars...it's part of the job. So that would hardly be a valid control.