Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Warrantless search - Rogers County
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="kingfish" data-source="post: 3943779" data-attributes="member: 50496"><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="kingfish, post: 3943779, member: 50496"] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Warrantless search - Rogers County
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom