Eventually they will figure out they are doing it wrong .
Eventually they will figure out they are doing it wrong .
I will tell you this, during the 80's and 90's if you took a random dollar bill out of the bank and submitted it to cocaine residue, it would test positive. About any denomination anywhere would test positive. It may be minuscule amounts of cocaine, but it would test. This was according the the FBI and KBI labs.
I'm organizing my thoughts on how to proceed, and I welcome any input in organizing my thoughts.
1) My ultimate goal for any action is that the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. I want my son and everyone else to go peacably about their business secure against capricious search and battery upon their persons.
To that end I want the Rogers County Sheriff's Department spanked for violating my son's person. How best to proceed?
Supporting facts:
1) The brake lights are and were in fact functioning, negating the stated reason for his stop.
2) Any LEOs can help me out here: do you normally perform a "taillight" stop with three vehicles and a dog?
3) In a "tailight" stop do you normally pull the driver out, search him, handcuff him, and place him in the police vehicle?
4) Stated reason for the search of his person and vehicle was "smelling weed." As there was no weed found nor confiscated, this reason is tenuous at best and certainly bears the appearance of a blanket excuse to violate his person and effects.
5) Questioning him for what could be a felony suspicion without advising him of his rights probably violates Miranda (more research needed.)
6) There was no marijuana, nor any reasonable suspicion of marijuana.
7) Is the mere presence of (a suspicion of) marijuana grounds for a warrantless search? (More research needed.)
1) My ultimate goal for any action is that the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. I want my son and everyone else to go peacably about their business secure against capricious search and battery upon their persons.
To that end I want the Rogers County Sheriff's Department spanked for violating my son's person. How best to proceed?
Supporting facts:
1) The brake lights are and were in fact functioning, negating the stated reason for his stop.
2) Any LEOs can help me out here: do you normally perform a "taillight" stop with three vehicles and a dog?
3) In a "tailight" stop do you normally pull the driver out, search him, handcuff him, and place him in the police vehicle?
4) Stated reason for the search of his person and vehicle was "smelling weed." As there was no weed found nor confiscated, this reason is tenuous at best and certainly bears the appearance of a blanket excuse to violate his person and effects.
5) Questioning him for what could be a felony suspicion without advising him of his rights probably violates Miranda (more research needed.)
6) There was no marijuana, nor any reasonable suspicion of marijuana.
7) Is the mere presence of (a suspicion of) marijuana grounds for a warrantless search? (More research needed.)
The smell of weed would pretty much give carte blanche to search, I'd think. Find something? Yep, smelled weed. Didn't find anything? Must have been in the wind, passing car or who knows. Which could certainly be legit, I smell it all the time driving around, walking/running, shopping and so on.
I wish they'd breed an odorless weed. Would be a big improvement for everybody.
I wish they'd breed an odorless weed. Would be a big improvement for everybody.
This is exactly how often cocaine and feces show up on your dollar bills
Here’s five of the scariest substances that scientists have found on your money.
- Cocaine. Yes, you’ve probably handled drug money. Traces of cocaine can be found on 80% of dollar bills, which have been laced by people rolling up the bills to snort the drug, or from money and coke changing hands during drug deals. And traces of morphine, heroin, methamphetamine and amphetamine have also been found on bills, although not as commonly as cocaine.
- Poop. A 2002 report in the Southern Medical Journal reported that paper money can carry more germs than a household toilet. A whopping 94% of dollar bills tested contained harmful pathogens like staphylococcus - the bacteria that causes staph infections, and can be passed by not washing your hands after using the restroom, or from contaminated food and dairy products.
- Acne agents. Apart from staff infections, the petri dish that passes for your cash also carries acne-causing bacteria in abundance, as well as microbes linked to pneumonia, food poisoning and gastric ulcers, with even some traces of antibiotic-resistant MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) bacteria.
- Dog spit. The NYC study that found more than 100 different strains of bacteria on dollar bills also found traces of DNA from unspecified domestic animals. A previous NYU study, however, found trace DNA from animals including dogs and, surprisingly, horses.
- Food. Food particles have been found on money and on ATM keypads as we eat and then take out money to pay for our grub. In fact, these traces could be used to track human behavior, as a 2016 study of NYC ATMs found that Harlem residents left more domestic chicken traces on ATMs than those in Flushing and Chinatown, who left more traces of bony fish and mollusks. But this can also transmit food-borne illnesses like salmonella and E. coli.
Find an ACLU type lawyer and let them have at it.
The big ***** is that the taxpayers will pay for whatever legal BS those clowns go through.
Qualified immunity should go away.
As a fellow that came of age in strip bars, I can tell you never, never put money in your mouth. You don't know where it's been, and I think I've seen about every possibility.
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.
- Joined
- May 14, 2020
- Messages
- 8,520
- Reaction score
- 27,002
Not gonna get into a pissing contest over this particular stop, but I will tell you about vehicle stops and MJ odors in general.
In general, the odor of MJ alone may not establish probable cause for a search of a car. However, if a trained K9 "alerts" on the car in the handlers judgment, that and the smell the officer detected will likely be enough to establish PC.
And keep in mind, a dog can alert on odors a human will never sense. So, if someone was riding with your son in his car a week ago, and had the odor of marijuana on his person, that might still be detected by the dog. And possibly by an officer depending on circumstances. It's possible. It could also be possible a seed or some shake from the weed might have fallen off that person on to the floor, seats, etc. One would likely not even notice it or recognize it but a dog could easily smell it. That's also entirely possible...I know because I've seen it on numerous occasions.
Once that PC is established a warrantless search may be conducted into any place within the vehicle where the contraband might be concealed (in this case, marijuana). So the officer could pretty much search the person and vehicle along with contents of the vehicle. They wouldn't be allowed, for example, to look thru his phone...because MJ can't be hidden in a phone.
In general, the odor of MJ alone may not establish probable cause for a search of a car. However, if a trained K9 "alerts" on the car in the handlers judgment, that and the smell the officer detected will likely be enough to establish PC.
And keep in mind, a dog can alert on odors a human will never sense. So, if someone was riding with your son in his car a week ago, and had the odor of marijuana on his person, that might still be detected by the dog. And possibly by an officer depending on circumstances. It's possible. It could also be possible a seed or some shake from the weed might have fallen off that person on to the floor, seats, etc. One would likely not even notice it or recognize it but a dog could easily smell it. That's also entirely possible...I know because I've seen it on numerous occasions.
Once that PC is established a warrantless search may be conducted into any place within the vehicle where the contraband might be concealed (in this case, marijuana). So the officer could pretty much search the person and vehicle along with contents of the vehicle. They wouldn't be allowed, for example, to look thru his phone...because MJ can't be hidden in a phone.
Similar threads
