Did the US Supreme Court Ignite a Rash of No-Knock Raids?

Did the US Supreme Court Ignite a Rash of No-Knock Raids?

Prior to 2006, if the police raided your home they had to prove that the raid was executed in the proper manner.  If it wasn't, then the evidence they found might not be admissible in court. 

In 2006, the United States Supreme Court issued Hudson v. Michigan.  In that case, a regular search warrant for Hudson's home was executed as  'no-knock" warrant.  The question for the court was whether the police could still use what they found, even though they did not execute the warrant properly.  The Supreme Court ruled that they could. 

After that opinion, I wondered why any police force anywhere would bother knocking ever again.  There's no benefit to police by knocking, and now the Supreme Court has said that even if the police do not knock, they still get to use what they find to convict the homeowner.

Since Hudson, it seems like we have seen a rash of botched no-knock raids that have resulted in innocent people getting shot and/or disfigured.  I wonder whether the Supreme Court opened the door to this or whether other forces were at play.  Or both. 

Your thoughts?

And no discussion of no-knock raids would be complete without Lindy's somber "No Knock Raid."

Continue reading
3901 Hits
0 Comments

Forsyth County Forfeits an Entire House

Forsyth County Forfeits an Entire House

Drug forfeitures are usually relatively small.  The police might forfeit the cash someone has in their wallet or automobile or the automobile itself, but rarely do you see an entire house forfeited without a fight.  But that's apparently exactly what happened in Forsyth County:

The Forsyth County Sheriff’s Office is now the owner of a single-family home in west Forsyth, whose former residents the agency described as repeat drug offenders.

According to the sheriff’s office, Forsyth County Superior Court awarded it the two-story, 2,500-square-foot home in Sawnee View Farms on Oct. 29.

The house, which has a basement and sits on a half-acre lot, has been valued at about $258,000, according to county tax records.

The sheriff’s office believes this is the first time in recent memory that a house has been given to the county based on criminal activity.

But there is a catch: 

Despite the sheriff’s office taking ownership of the home, the agency still must undergo legal eviction proceedings to expel the people living in what he characterized as a “transient drug house.”

The home will eventually be put on the market, hopefully with an agent, but Piper said the sale will yield little, if any, profit.

The agency must first pay of the liens and mortgages against the property, which total about half the value of the house, he said. They will also pay the costs of the required legal proceedings.

Any remaining money would be handled through the legal guidelines of drug seizure funds.

The home was awarded to the sheriff’s office in a consent judgment, which states Wheeler agreed to forfeit the property.

That's highly unusual, which makes me think there is more to this story than meets the eye.  I can imagine what that might be, but it wouldn't be appropriate for me to speculate.

 

Continue reading
3961 Hits
0 Comments

War on Drugs Claims Another Officer's Life

War on Drugs Claims Another Officer's Life

In Ogden, Utah, the War on Drugs has claimed the life of another officer.  

The tip about the marijuana plants came from an ex-girlfriend of Stewart's named Stacy Wilson. They had dated for about a year and a half but broke up in the summer of 2010. Erna Stewart introduced them. "I still feel guilty about that," she says. "He caught her cheating on him, they broke up, and it ended really badly. She was angry with him. He was heartbroken. She tried to get him fired from his job. She really had it out for him."

. . .

According to police documents, Wilson called the tip line in November 2010, two months before the raid, and spoke with Officer Jason Vanderwarf. Vanderwarf visited Stewart's house three times, but no one answered. After finding what he described as signs of a marijuana grow, however, he filed an affidavit to get the warrant.

That appears to be the extent of the investigation. The police never ran a background check on Wilson to assess her credibility. In fact, after their initial conversation, Vanderwarf said that he was "unable to contact her." He later told investigators that "She kinda fell off the face of the earth."

While there has been outrage over the death of the officer and the wounding of five others, there is also outrage over the use of military-style, life-or-death tactics employed in response to a victimless, non-violent crime such as growing marijuana. 

In the months following the raid, a number of other controversial police actions hit the news. Police in Salt Lake City broke into the home of a 76-year-old woman during a mistaken drug raid. A SWAT team in Ogden went to the wrong address in search of a man who had gone AWOL from the Army and ended up pointing its guns at an innocent family of four. Two narcotics detectives shot and killed a young woman in a suburb of Salt Lake City as she sat in her car.

Together, these incidents have spawned a budding police reform movement in Utah. At the head of it, Stewart's family members have been joined by a political odd couple: Jesse Fruhwirth, a longtime progressive activist rabble-rouser, and Connor Boyack, a wonky libertarian with a background in Republican politics. And independently, in Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County, the police chief and lead prosecutor have already begun to adopt some unconventional, reform-minded approaches to crime and punishment.

In the Ken Burns documentary "Prohibition", Burns interviews the son of a law enforcement officer shot and killed in an alcohol raid during Prohibition, just a few years before alcohol was re-legalized.  I would wager that years from now, the loved ones of this officer will look back and question why officers were expected to risk their lives over something like marijuana prohibition.  Applying a cost-benefit analysis, I question whether it is worth it.

This is one of a six-part series on the Utah movement to reform aggressive police tactics in drug cases.  

Continue reading
4278 Hits
0 Comments

"War on Drugs" Employs Forced Colonoscopy and Enema

"War on Drugs" Employs Forced Colonoscopy and Enema

These New Mexico officers really dig for the truth.  

David Eckert, 54, spent more than 12 hours in custody last January at a police station and local hospital after being pulled over for a traffic violation. Yet he was never charged, nor did authorities find illicit substances on him.

. . . 

After Eckert was pulled over, a Deming police officer said that he saw Eckert "was avoiding eye contact with me," his "left hand began to shake," and he stood "erect (with) his legs together," the affidavit stated.

Eckert was told he could go home after a third officer issued him a traffic citation. But before he did, Eckert voluntarily consented to a search of him and his vehicle, the affidavit states. A K-9 dog subsequently hit on a spot in the Dodge's driver's seat, though no drugs were found.


. . . 

Eckert was then put in "investigative detention" and transported around 2 p.m. to the Deming Police Department.

Sometime after that, a judge signed off a search warrant "to include but not limited to his anal cavity."

The next stop was Gila Regional Medical Center, where the lawsuit states "no drugs were found" in "an x-ray and two digital searches of his rectum by two different doctors." One doctor at this time found nothing unusual in his stool.

Three enemas were conducted on Eckert after 10:20 p.m. A chest X-ray followed, succeeded by a colonoscopy around 1:25 a.m.

After all this, "no drugs were found in or on Plaintiff's person."

I wonder how much taxpayer dollars were spent here to go after an amount of drugs no larger than will fit in the human colon.  That's going to be at most a misdemeanor amount of marijuana or a few grams of cocaine, methamphetamine or heroin.  Was it worth it?

Additionally, never, ever, ever consent to a search.  It can't help and it can only hurt.  Never do it.

Here's another take.  

Read More:

 $teakley's Golden Rules

Cops Raid Home; Find Fruit

Gwinnett Marijuana Grow House Searched, Bananas Found

TN Lawmakers Investigating "Policing for Profit"

How a Single Oxycontin Pill Nearly Ruined One Man's Life

Top Ten Ways to Damage Your Criminal Case

Continue reading
4376 Hits
0 Comments

Former Atlanta Braves Outfielder Otis Nixon Arrested - Again

Former Atlanta Braves Outfielder Otis Nixon Arrested - Again

Yahoo News reports that former Atlanta Braves outfielder Otis Nixon has been arrested for drugs in Cherokee County:

Nixon was pulled over just after midnight Saturday after another driver called police to report a Dodge Ram truck weaving all over the road, according to an incident report from the Cherokee County Sheriff's Office. The 54-year-old remained in jail Monday afternoon on $11,880 bond.

Officers found a pipe for smoking crack cocaine in Nixon's pants pocket and found a suspected crack rock in the driver's seat, the report says. They later found another pipe and more suspected crack rocks in the floor board of the driver's side, as well as other paraphernalia.

A sheriff's deputy arrested Nixon on charges of possession of cocaine and possession of a drug-related object. It wasn't immediately clear Monday whether Nixon had a lawyer.

Nixon told officers he was driving a friend home and didn't believe he was weaving. He told the sheriff's deputy that the substance officers found in the car was crack cocaine but said the pipes and drugs belonged to his son and that he had been planning to get rid of the pipe.

Officers conducted field sobriety tests and determined Nixon wasn't under the influence of crack cocaine or alcohol.

During my tenure as a Gwinnett County Assistant District Attorney, I prosecuted Mr. Nixon for an Aggravated Assault charge at a low-rent Gwinnett hotel, which I recall as stemming from a dispute over crack cocaine.

Mr. Nixon was very pleasant and friendly in court.  He was respectful and conducted himself with humble decorum, gladly signing autographs for a few court personnel.  He appeared then to be a good person dealing with a very bad drug addiction, and he knew it. 

But that was then and this is now.  I wish him well.

TMZ has the story.

AJC has the story.

MDJ has the story.

Continue reading
4471 Hits
0 Comments

Cops Raid Home; Find Fruit

Not much different than the Gwinnett County man who had his home raided for his own indoor garden, a Kansas couple has gotten a tough lesson in the War on Drugs and how none of us are safe

Two former CIA employees whose Kansas home was fruitlessly searched for marijuana during a two-state drug sweep claim they were illegally targeted, possibly because they had bought indoor growing supplies to raise vegetables.

. . .

April 20 long has been used by marijuana enthusiasts to celebrate the illegal drug and more recently by law enforcement for raids and crackdowns. But the Hartes' attorney, Cheryl Pilate, said she suspects the couple's 1,825-square-foot split level was targeted because they had bought hydroponic equipment to grow a small number of tomatoes and squash plants in their basement.

"With little or no other evidence of any illegal activity, law enforcement officers make the assumption that shoppers at the store are potential marijuana growers, even though the stores are most commonly frequented by backyard gardeners who grow organically or start seedlings indoors," the couple's lawsuit says.

How are these officers getting search warrants with no evidence of illegal activity?  The article should name the judge that issued the warrant and print the affidavit upon which it was issued.  But it gets worse:

"If this can happen to us and we are educated and have reasonable resources, how does somebody who maybe hasn't led a perfect life supposed to be free in this country?" Adlynn Harte said in an interview Friday.

Excellent question, Ms. Harte.

The suit filed in Johnson County District Court said the couple and their two children — a 7-year-old daughter and 13-year-old son — were "shocked and frightened" when deputies armed with assault rifles and wearing bulletproof vests pounded on the door of their home around 7:30 a.m. last April 20.

I'll bet they were.  Is this the same sort of "home invasion" the police are supposed to protect people from?

"It was just like on the cops TV shows," Robert Harte told The Associated Press. "It was like 'Zero Dark Thirty' ready to storm the compound."

Much like the local Gwinnett County case, police found nothing but edible fruits and became hostile and accusatory when it became obvious they wouldn't find anything:

When law enforcement arrived, the family had just six plants — three tomato plants, one melon plant and two butternut squash plants — growing in the basement, Harte said.

What do these police have against tasty indoor fruits?

The suit also said deputies "made rude comments" and implied their son was using marijuana. A drug-sniffing dog was brought in to help, but deputies ultimately left after providing a receipt stating, "No items taken."

Pilate said no one in the Harte family uses illegal drugs and no charges were filed. The lawsuit noted Adlynn Harte, who works for a financial planning firm, and Robert Harte, who cares for the couple's children, each were required to pass rigorous background checks for their previous jobs working for the CIA in Washington, D.C. Pilate said she couldn't provide any other details about their CIA employment.

Preventing these things would be alot easier if more courts would allow aggrieved citizens to sue the officers individually.

Continue reading
4718 Hits
0 Comments

Charges Dropped Amid Claims of Planting Evidence

Charges Dropped Amid Claims of Planting Evidence

This is one of those cases where the innocent vitim is very luck to have been sitting in view of a camera, and the cops not realize otherwise.

A man who claims a police officer planted drugs on him will have the charges dismissed one day before his case was set to go to trial.

Eleby said his nightmare began in July 2012 at the Chevron gas station on North Hairston Road.

He said he stopped to speak to someone who was sitting in a black SUV when an officer said he smelled marijuana and arrested the driver on charges of marijuana possession with intent to distribute.

"I was searched twice," Eleby said. He said no drugs were found on him and he was told to sit down.

His attorney said surveillance video from the location shows the officer call the officer guarding Eleby over to the SUV he had been searching.

As she searches the vehicle, Zenobia Waters said the video shows the officer circle back to her client and toss marijuana next to him. She said the officer then picks the drugs up and repositions them.

The video shows Eleby vehemently protesting what he sees the officer do and the officer then puts him in a chokehold while other officers look on.

Chokehold.  A chokehold because he complained about being framed. 

"The DeKalb County Police Department could not produce the alleged marijuana. Therefore, the State is without the evidence needed for trial. The dismissal is not related to how the alleged marijuana came into existence at the scene of the crime nor the videotape made at the scene of the crime."

I've heard stories that some cops drive around with an exta baggie of cocaine or mairjuana in their trunk that they can throw down by a suspect when they need to make a case.  The missing marijuana is probably already back in the officer's trunk helpking him make more cases. 

Without the video, it would be his word against at least two officers in front of a jury pool with at least a few people who think that anyone accused of a crime must be guilty of something.  He should have pulled out his cell phone and started recording.   That would have made some good, embarrasing YouTube video for this cop. 

Full article here.

Continue reading
4667 Hits
0 Comments

US Supreme Court Bites Back at Dog Searches

US Supreme Court Bites Back at Dog Searches

While the media's attention is squarely focused on the issue of gay marriage, the United States Supreme Court has released its "easy" decision in Florida v. Jardines regarding whether the police can bring a drug dog to your front door for a sniff without a search warrant.  As SCOTUSblog explains:

In an opinion written by Justice Scalia, the Court affirmed the Florida Supreme Court. The Court held a dog sniff at the front door of a house where the police suspected drugs were being grown constitutes a search for purposes of the Fourth Amendment. Justice Kagan filed a concurrence joined by Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor. Justice Alito filed a dissent joined by the Chief Justice, and Justices Kennedy and Breyer.

Note that the opinion was written by Justice Scalia and joined by Justice Thomas and Justice Ginsburg.  We saw these same three join in the majority in the Kyllo case from 2001 which held that police pointing a thermal imaging device at a home was also a search for 4th Amendment purposes.  Property rights cases are interesting at the Supreme Court level because you will often find Justices labeled as "liberal" or "conservative" joining forces.  It's not odd to see "liberals" siding with the government nor to see "conservatives" siding with homeowners.

The first question the court has to answer is whether bringing a dog to a homeowner's door is a search.  If it is, then case closed, because these particular officers were not authorized to conduct a search.  If it is not a search, more questions would follow.

From the opinion:

[W]hen it comes to the Fourth Amendment, the home is first among equals. At the Amendment’s “very core” stands “the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion.”    This right would be of little practical value if the State’s agents could stand in a home’s porch or side garden and trawl for evidence with impunity; the right to retreat would be significantly diminished if the police could enter a man’s property to observe his repose from just outside the front window.

We therefore regard the area “immediately surrounding and associated with the home”—what our cases call the curtilage—as “part of the home itself for Fourth Amendment purposes.”  That principle has ancient and durable roots. Just as the distinction between the home and the open fields is “as old as the common law,” so too is the identity of home and what Blackstone called the “curtilage or homestall,” for the “house protects and privileges all its branches and appurtenants.”  This area around the home is “intimately linked to the home, both physically and psychologically,” and is where “privacy expectations are most heightened.”  

While the boundaries of the curtilage are generally “clearly marked,” the “conception defining the curtilage” is at any rate familiar enough that it is “easily understood from our daily experience.”  Here there is no doubt that the officers entered it: The front porch is the classic exemplar of an area adjacent to the home and “to which the activity of home life extends.”

Because the Court holds that bringing a drug dog to the front door of a home is a search, they avoid having to answer other questions about whether a dog's behavior at the front door gives officers grounds for an immediate exigent circumstances search, a search warrant based on the dog's behavior, or nothing at all.  Those questions will have to wait for a later day, for as Justice Scalia writes, "One virtue of the Fourth Amendment’s property-rights baseline is that it keeps easy cases easy."

Continue reading
4270 Hits
0 Comments

Gwinnett Marijuana Grow House Searched, Bananas Found

Gwinnett Marijuana Grow House Searched, Bananas Found

A Gwinnett County amateur botanist got a hard lesson in the War on Drugs recently.  Police appeared at his door with "information" that he had a marijuana grow house and a search warrant to boot.  They were determined and rude, harassing the innocent homeowner for a confession to a crime he wasn't committing:  

"They said, 'Just say you had plants and you moved them someplace else.' And I just kept telling them the truth. There was never a marijuana garden here," said Scott Smithwick.

Smithwick has set up high intensity lamps, fans and a watering system in two basement rooms in the Lawrenceville home that he shares with his father. He said he does not grow, sell or smoke marijuana and uses the equipment to cultivate mostly tropical plants and flowers.

"I'm a plant freak. Inside I grow banana plants, orchids, and other tropical plants," Smithwick told Channel 2's Tom Regan.

Smithwick has banana trees growing in his basement in January.  Those aren't plants you can grow outside in Georgia in winter.

Several weeks ago, police went to his home twice, the second time with a search warrant. They said they had information that he was producing marijuana.

Information from whom?  Let's name the person who claims this guy was growing marijuana. Additionally, the police should have corroborated the information before getting the search warrant. It sounds like they skipped that part.

Smithwick said he asked if he could videotape officers while they search his home and was told no.

"The sergeant became extremely hostile. His response was, 'Are you serious? I'll handcuff you and detain you in that chair,'" Smithwick said. "They were convinced I had a marijuana garden in here and had just gotten rid of it."

So a guy who is not under arrest and standing inside his own home can't videotape the police while they search for evidence to use against him?  I think otherwise.  In fact, I think Mr. Smithwick would be a poster child for the claim that he has a Constitutional Due Process right to videotape this search as a way of preserving evidence that may be useful in his defense. 

Smithwick said when police found no marijuana they threatened to arrest him for having equipment and materials that could be used to grow pot.

'The sergeant told me based on (the) fertilizers and the lights in the room, I could be charged with manufacturing marijuana and held without bond and sent to prison," Smithwick said.

Uh, no.  Fertilizer isn't a crime.  Grow lights aren't a crime.  Fertilizer and grow lights together aren't a crime.  Even if he was planning on growing marijuana next week, Georgia courts are clear that "preparing to commit a crime isn't a crime."  Purchasing gasoline isn't arson, even if that's why you're purchasing the gasoline.

Smithwick said the threats and intimidation by investigators amounted to harassment.

When the don't have, you know, actual evidence of a crime, threats and intimidation are all they have left and that's what they fall back on.

"As a member of this community, a taxpayer and a voter, I think I deserve some answers," Smithwick said.

We all do, Mr. Smithwick, but don't expect to get them.  Enjoy your bananas.

Continue reading
6971 Hits
0 Comments

Elderly Couple Stopped, Interrogated for Buckeye

Elderly Couple Stopped, Interrogated for Buckeye

A couple of senior citizens driving through Tennessee were stopped and interrogated for being Ohio State fans: 

Bonnie Jonas-Boggioni, 65, and her husband were driving home to Plano, Texas from Columbus after attending her mother-in-law’s funeral when a pair of black police SUV’s stopped the couple a few miles outside of Memphis.

Apparently, Bonnie Jonas-Boggioni, former president of the Ohio State Alumni Club in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, had an Ohio State Buckeye football decal on her vehicle.  Police mistook it for a marijuana leaf. 

They were very serious,” she said. “They had the body armor and the guns.”

Because the couple’s two schnauzers were barking furiously, one of the officers had Jonas-Boggioni exit the car so he could hear her better.

“What are you doing with a marijuana sticker on your bumper?” he asked her.

She explained that it is actually a Buckeye leaf decal, just like the ones that Ohio State players are given to put on their helmets to mark good plays.

“He looked at me like I was speaking a foreign language,” she said.

Continue reading
4057 Hits
0 Comments

SWAT For All

SWAT For All

Over at the National Review Online, Deroy Murdock suggests that the real "gun control" we need is control of government guns:

Overarmed federal officials increasingly employ military tactics as a first resort in routine law enforcement. From food-safety cases to mundane financial matters, battle-ready public employees are turning America into the United States of SWAT.

Read the whole thing for some examples of SWAT Gone Wild. 

And of course, no discussion of SWAT and drug raids would be complete without Lindy's "No-Knock Raid" (NSFW or kids):

More:

City of Paragould Proposes Suspicionless Stops By Armed SWAT Agents

S.W.A.T.ting

 

Continue reading
4171 Hits
0 Comments

Top Five Reasons To Say NO To A Police Search

Top Five Reasons To Say NO To A Police Search

There are many more reasons than just these five, but they make a good start

1. It's your constitutional right.

The 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects us against unreasonable searches and seizures. Unless police have strong evidence (probable cause) to believe you're involved in criminal activity, they need your permission to perform a search of you or your property.

You have the right to refuse random police searches anywhere and anytime, so long as you aren't crossing a border checkpoint or entering a secure facility like an airport. Don't be shy about standing up for your own privacy rights, especially when police are looking for evidence that could put you behind bars.

Continue reading
5250 Hits
0 Comments

Drug Dog's Nose is Good Enough

Drug Dog's Nose is Good Enough

One of the biggest abuses of power I regularly see is in the use of "drug dogs."  Police use a drug dog's "alert" to allow them to search places they normally can't legally search.  That's all well and good if the dog is reliable, but in this story we read about a drug dog that is right only 26% of the time!  That means that roughly three out of every four times the dog alerts, an innocent person is subjected to an illegal search.

But that's not legal is it?  Surely the courts wouldn't allow a dog that's wrong 75% of the time to be an excuse to ignore the Constitution?  Think again:

The nose of a drug-sniffing police dog is not so sharp, but it's good enough to support cocaine charges against Herbert Green.

. . .

Green's lawyer had argued that Bono's track record — drugs were found just 22 times out of 85 "alerts" by the dog — was so poor that police lacked probable cause to search Green's SUV.

. . . 

Bono "may not be a model of canine accuracy," Conrad wrote in an opinion filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Roanoke.

. . .

At a hearing earlier this month, Assistant U.S. Attorney Ashley Neese defended the performance of the German shepherd.

In some cases where nothing was found after an alert by Bono, police later determined that drugs had been in the vehicle earlier, likely leaving an odor the dog was trained to detect, Neese said.

Taking those cases into account, Conrad found that Bono's accuracy rate was at least 50 percent.

Continue reading
4997 Hits
0 Comments

The Sad Case of Lester Eugene Siler

The Sad Case of Lester Eugene Siler

Before I moved to Georgia in 2001, I was an Assistant District Attorney General in the Eighth Judicial District of Tennessee.  It is a sprawling 5-county district in two different time zones, but most of my work was in the largest county of Campbell.  When I say "large", I'm talking about maybe 45,000 people, or about 1/15th the size of Cobb County or Gwinnett County, and 1/20th the size of Fulton County of Dekalb County.  Everyone knows everyone else, pretty much.  There's one main high school, one Wal-Mart, one McDonalds.  You can't go to either without seeing someone you know.  So when I became a prosecutor, I already knew many of the cops and had gone to school with many of them. 

Not long after leaving the office five years later, news broke that five officers had been arrested for torturing a local small-time drug dealer named Lester Siler.  I didn't think much of it until I leared that there was a recording.  Apparently, Siler's wife had hidden a recorder when she saw the police approaching the house.  What happened next was awful and heartbreaking.  They threatened and mistreated Siler in order to get him to sign a form consenting to the search of his house, but in the recording you can already hear them beginning to search.

The police would later be arrested and prosecuted federally.  Most or all served prison time.  When I read the transcript of them torture and threaten a guy to sign a document consenting to a search of his house, I wonder in how many more "consent" searches and "voluntary" confessions that were actually the result of torture came across my desk? I have no idea.

Except for Siler's wife recording the event, no one would know about it.  I wouldn't be writing about Lester Siler and you wouldn't be reading about him.  It would be just another drug case where the police claim that the homeowner consented to a search of his home and signed a document saying so.    Even if Siler said otherwise, no one would have believed him.

If you have contact with the police in Georgia, record it.  It can't hurt, and it may help.

John

Continue reading
7736 Hits
0 Comments

City of Paragould Proposes Suspicionless Stops By Armed SWAT Agents

Someone had better talk some sense into this guy before he bankrupts the city with wrongful arrest lawsuits

Continue reading
4303 Hits
0 Comments

Don't Talk To The Police - EVER!

This is the one thing most clients get wrong.  When I first becamse a prosecutor, I was amazed at how many cases are built around a confession.  Clients think they can talk their way out of trouble or that remaining silent will look worse than talking.  Cop have tactics to encourage people to talk, such as "minimization" and accusatory questions.  Most people are shocked to learn that cops are allowed to lie to suspects to convince the suspects to talk.

Then there are cops that just torture people until they get what they want, but we can discuss that in another post sometime. 

Regent U. law professor James Duane does an outstanding job explaining why even the most innocent of suspects should never talk to the police absent a lawyer.  Unfortunately, most citizens do not learn this lesson until it is too late.  For that reason, it is often important to address a client's statement to the police early in the case to determine whether it is admissible in court against him or her. It's a long video, but it's worth it.

If you are detained (meaning you aren't free to walk away) by an officer, you should wait until you've consulted with an attorney before dealing with the police.  Give them your correct name and date of birth (or SSN) and then ask if you are free to leave.  If you are, leave.  If you aren't, ask for a lawyer.

 

Continue reading
5737 Hits
0 Comments

Cop Fired for Planting Dope Under Orders

Cop Fired for Planting Dope Under Orders

Just because someone gets arrested for having drugs in their car doesn't mean they had drugs in their car. 

Police Street Crimes Unit investigator Tim White is out of a job for swiping grass from an evidence locker and planting it at a residence to beef up the grounds for a search warrant application. Even more interesting, he says he did so on orders from a supervisor.

Continue reading
4015 Hits
0 Comments

5 Reasons You Should Never Agree to a Police Search

Scott Morgan at Huffington Post lists the 5 Reasons to Never Consent to a Police Search.   Morgan writes:

It wouldn't even be such a big deal, I suppose, if our laws all made sense and our public servants always treated us as citizens first and suspects second. But thanks to the War on Drugs, nothing is ever that easy. When something as stupid as stopping people from possessing marijuana came to be considered a critical law enforcement function, innocence ceased to protect people against police harassment. From the streets of the Bronx to the suburbs of the Nation's Capital, you never have to look hard to find victims of the bias, incompetence, and corruption that the drug war delivers on a daily basis.

Whether or not you ever break the law, you should be prepared to protect yourself and your property just in case police become suspicious of you. Let's take a look at one of the most commonly misunderstood legal situations a citizen can encounter: a police officer asking to search your belongings. Most people automatically give consent when police ask to perform a search. However, I recommend saying "no" to police searches, and here are some reasons why:

Continue reading
4086 Hits
0 Comments