Mostly Positive LEO encounter


PDA






funkerbunny
August 13, 2008, 06:51 AM
Monday we where driving back from a computer security convention in Las Vegas through Eagle County, Colorado when we noticed two sheriff's vehicles on the highway. One passed us and the other started riding our tail. Next thing I notice is the first officer pulls someone over and moments later my girlfriend pulls over.

The officer comes over and asks for license/registration and all that which my honey produces and we wait for the officer to check everything. At this point
I'm sure everything is fine, but moments later the officer reappears and asks my honey to step out of the car.
Then another officer appears and informs us they are out there looking for people smuggling large amounts of drugs, illegal guns, hand grenades etc, but not personal amounts of drugs so if we have any we should tell him now.

Both my friend Tom and I tell him no, we do not have anything illegal and he asks again, adding that they will find "The stuff". After reiterating that we do not have anything illegal the officer looks at me and asks if I'm the NRA member (we had a NRA bumper sticker on the back of the car). I answer that yes I am and leave it at that. The cop then informs us that even though my girlfriend refused a search they will be searching because they "smelled pot on her registration papers"

So we get out of the car, and watch for a good hour and a half as they run a drug dog through the car, go through all our bags eventually finding our trunk gun (a topper 158 shotgun), a bunch of 7.62x54r cases and a can of OC spray. They inspect the shotgun for a bit, ask me what kind of gun the 7.62x54r cases are from and eventually put our stuff back in the car.

The first cop (an older gentleman who was actually pretty friendly) comes over and gives back our licenses then turns to me and the following conversation starts:
Cop: So what do you need the shotgun for on a roadtrip to vegas ?
Me: Well its a long trip, I've seen alot of horror movies and well honestly officer I worry about Zombies.
Cop: (smiling) I can Understand that
The officers than bid us farewell and let us leave (with our shotgun!)

The only thing that bothers me is why would they say they smelled pot on the registration papers? None of us smoke pot and I'm left with the feeling that they lied so they could search the car. (is this common when you refuse a search?) Anyways, other than delaying us a few hours, things worked out pretty well I think.

If you enjoyed reading about "Mostly Positive LEO encounter" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
PTK
August 13, 2008, 07:02 AM
That's very rare here in Colorado. I've had nothing but entirely positive encounters with police thus far.

They will make up PC if you look suspicious, it's profiling, not illegal, valid police tactic. Unfortunately, the laws being the way they are the police sometimes must do such things.

SCKimberFan
August 13, 2008, 07:04 AM
Sounds like a ruse to search the car. Obviously, they couldn't "smell pot on her registration papers" since neither of you smoke it (taking you at your word that you don't). Even so, that doesn't sound to me like reasonable cause to search, although IANAL.

Mostly positive, I don't think so.

Deanimator
August 13, 2008, 07:10 AM
I'm sorry, if indeed they lied for the search, that's a crime and a civil tort.

I'm one of the few people I know who've never smoked marijuana. You accuse me of using drugs and use that as an excuse for a warrantless search and you're going to have a VERY bad year. I would NEVER let this go.

SomeKid
August 13, 2008, 07:11 AM
Hardly positive.

Tell me you are filing a complaint at the very least for that.

As an aside, when cops are nice and make small talk, they are looking for a reason to bust you. Don't talk to them.

If I was in that position, I would be a broken record.

"Am I free to go?"
"I do not consent to this search."

Of course, before it was over I would have all their info. Even if I couldn't sue them until they were poor and on the street, I would file a formal complaint. Supposedly any complaints look bad when it comes to review. Might cost him a promotion/pay raise later.

And now, the JBT sympathizers will come along and tell about how awful I am, and how they are good guys and deserve your cooperation, and other further encourage Quisling like actions towards our masters.

Like Deanimator, I never have done drugs in my life. I think the reason it would tick me off so bad is they are basically slandering me, saying I either smoke pot, or associate with the type that do.

Deanimator
August 13, 2008, 07:15 AM
Like Deanimator, I never have done drugs in my life. I think the reason it would tick me off so bad is they are basically slandering me, saying I either smoke pot, or associate with the type that do.
Wouldn't it funny if my attorney got the cop on the stand and asked HIM under oath if HE had ever used drugs? "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, Officer Smedlap, HIMSELF an ADMITTED DRUG USER, has falsely accused my client of using illegal drugs!"

SomeKid
August 13, 2008, 07:16 AM
That would be quite comical Dean.

Steve in PA
August 13, 2008, 07:43 AM
So the officer smelled pot on the papers, but the dog didn't hit on anything???

Fisherman_48768
August 13, 2008, 07:57 AM
So the officer smelled pot on the papers, but the dog didn't hit on anything??? That happens when your dealing with a super cop that hasn't changed his shorts lately. And they wonder why the people have so little faith in them doughnut munchers.

emb
August 13, 2008, 08:06 AM
I would not call this a positive encounter either. It's a violation of your civil and constitutional rights.

The police had no right to stop you or detain you. The PC was simply manufactured and pretexual.

When LEOs become LEOs they take an oath to uphold the rule of the constitution, including your civil rights. You need to report this and take action.

Here in Florida several years ago, an agency had an entire unit of rogue drug enforcement agents. All are or were doing federal time based upon one officer's courage to come forward. When he did what was uncovered was simply astounding!

Unfortunately, I do not automatically trust law enforcement officers. You never know what you are dealing with. I do, however, give them the benefit of doubt. Be polite and accommodating, but say as little as possible. You don't need them manufacturing the charges.

Also, never, ever consent to a search-even if you have nothing to hide. In the case I mentioned, the car was searched, even with a dog, but no drugs were found until a certain officer showed up.

This stuff really happened and the corruption did not stop with drug busts. Some officers justify this behavior, but it is wrong, and you should take action anytime you confront it.

Most of my encounters with LEOs have been very positive, and I still have a great deal of respect for what they do and have to put up with. But in our country the ends does not justify the means.

One man can and will make a difference. It did in our county. Twelve officers were indicted and tried for civil rights violations and related state crimes. 5 or 6 of them did 2-3 years in various federal pens.

FCFC
August 13, 2008, 08:26 AM
Bad stop. Bad search. No PC. Blatant lying by LEO.

Formal complaint would be very appropriate.


And now, the JBT sympathizers will come along and tell about how awful I am, and how they are good guys and deserve your cooperation, and other further encourage Quisling like actions towards our masters.

"JBT sympathizers"????

Wow, that's wayyyy out there. I don't see the purpose of a strawman argument in this case. It's purposeless. It's pretty clear that the reported LEOs overstepped their bounds.

I guess we'll see if any "JBT sympathizers" or "Quislings" follow on with their subservient encouragement. If they do, you will be right. If not, well, then...I guess you'd be wrong. :rolleyes:

Dave P
August 13, 2008, 08:29 AM
"Anyways, other than delaying us a few hours, things worked out pretty well I think."

Well FB, I think you need to raise your level of expectation, and also educate yourself on your rights and also on tricks played by those in authoritarian positions.

"so if we have any we should tell him now. " Never incriminate yourself! If they didn't care about small amounts, then they wouldn't care about smelling pot on the papers.

"older gentleman who was actually pretty friendly" You were falling for the Good Cop/Bad Cop trick.

So they detained you, Tom and your Honey (I assume that was not Tom) for a few hours. As computer security geeks, what is your hourly time worth?? $25/hr x 2 hours x 3 people = $150

TallPine
August 13, 2008, 08:56 AM
Colorado has become another police state :(

Deanimator
August 13, 2008, 09:00 AM
So they detained you, Tom and your Honey (I assume that was not Tom) for a few hours. As computer security geeks, what is your hourly time worth?? $25/hr x 2 hours x 3 people = $150
I get $30, sometimes more.

I'd document what that cop did to the nth degree, then I'd make sure that every lawyer for three states in any direction knew his name. They'd "Brady" the living daylights out him. I wonder how a cop can get promoted if he can NEVER testify in a criminal case again, because NO prosecutor will put him on the stand?

Vermont
August 13, 2008, 09:01 AM
Yeah, that doesn't sound like a positive encounter to me either. What would qualify as a negative encounter for you? Would you need to get arrested? Tazered? Shot?

Why did they pull you over in the first place?

Dope
August 13, 2008, 09:06 AM
If that's a mostly positive encounter, what's a neutral or mostly negative encounter? When they taze your honey for no reason and she dies in the ditch? That's not so bad I guess, at least you survived, right? Damn.

At least you can submit a complaint without suffering too much. If it were local cops you'd be harassed to no end, not worth the trouble :(

Dope

Deanimator
August 13, 2008, 09:29 AM
At least you can submit a complaint without suffering too much. If it were local cops you'd be harassed to no end, not worth the trouble
Harass me. My lawyer works in the next office building over. I could use the money for guns... and a five bedroom house with a walk-in vault to put them in. Ohio's a one party consent state when it comes to audio recording. Juries eat that stuff up.

JohnBlaze
August 13, 2008, 09:48 AM
Yeah, it doesn't sound very positive to me either. I don't subscribe to the theory that most LEO's are bad, but I've met a crooked few. These seem to fit into that category.

Deanimator
August 13, 2008, 10:11 AM
I don't subscribe to the theory that most LEO's are bad, but I've met a crooked few.
I subscribe to the theory that you should reward the good ones and skin the bad ones alive, in a rhetorical fashion of course... mostly.

Treo
August 13, 2008, 10:20 AM
Bad stop all the way around, that's been covered. If they smile while they rape you & say thank you when they're done, is it good sex?

One thing that hasn't been covered is if they lied to you to search the car ( I personally think you'd have a hell of a time proving that) what makes you think they wouldn't plant drugs?

This hasn't been covered enough. If I read the OP correctly the cops pulled you over specifically to search the car. You should have been totally en garde at that point. "Officer I do not consent to any searches" "Officer I do not wish to make any statement W/out my attorney present" "Officer can you please contact your supervisor and have him meet us here?" There's actually a really good video on youtube called "Busted, a citizens guide to surviving an encounter W/ the law" that deals specifically W/ this issue. it should be Mandatory viewing.

Last point "We smelled weed on your paper work" as soon as you had that paper work back in your hand I'd have smelled it myself and said "It doesn't smell odd to me. May I have your business card & the name & contact information for you shift supervisor, as well as, the name and phone number for the County Sheriff please?"

File a complaint

ImARugerFan
August 13, 2008, 10:35 AM
Illegal search of your vehicle is entirely negative, not mostly positive.

jrfoxx
August 13, 2008, 10:37 AM
I agree that the search was B.S. and trumped up. If he had smelled pot on the papers, the dog would have DEFINITELY smelled it in the car too.Since it didn't, he's obviously full of it (or I suppose just really has no ides the difference between the smell of pot, and ink/paper, which really doesn't make him any better).I have had the old "I can smell pot" thing used on me a few times in my younger days.Good excuse for them to search when you refuse, as nobody can really prove a smell one way or the other, so they know there really isn't anything you can do about it, and it give them PC due to bad court rulings about smell being legit PC.:barf:

But, other than that, at least they were polite, and didn't decide to give a bunch of hassle over the gun when the fishing for pot didn't work out, so I suppose it could have been worse. Being held up for several hours stinks though, and doesn't seem necessary. How long does it take to run a dog thru a car? certainly not a few hours (more like a few minutes after the dog arrives, I know first hand).

I'd rate it as "positive" only in that it could have taken longer, or they could have hassled over the gun, or been rude/mean/nasty on top of everything, but all in all, not what I'd call positive. Beats the time a Detroit city cop smacked me in the face though, so again, coulda been worse.

dogmush
August 13, 2008, 10:39 AM
I've had many positive encounters with cops; What you described is definatly not one. Had it happened to me I would STILL be angry.

They will make up PC if you look suspicious, it's profiling, not illegal, valid police tactic. Unfortunately, the laws being the way they are the police sometimes must do such things

Um wow, MAKING UP Probibale cause most definatly is illegal, and the laws are the way they are specificly to STOP police from doing such things.

I think when the drug dog didn't hit on the car, I would have told officer Sniffy to get a lawyer. When the DOG doesn't smell drugs, no jury will ever belieive the officer did.


But, other than that, at least they were polite, and didn't decide to give a bunch of hassle over the gun when the fishing for pot didn't work out, so I suppose it could have been worse. Being held up for several hours stinks though, and doesn't seem necessary. How long does it take to run a dog thru a car? certainly not a few hours (more like a few minutes after the dog arrives, I know first hand).

I'd hate to need a tin-foil hat but are we really to the point where being polite while violating you and not hassling you for legal activities is good enough?

abrink
August 13, 2008, 10:41 AM
If this took place in VA the cop could be arrested and placed in jail for up to 10 years for knowingly violating your rights. Of course there's a possibility that he did smell something that had an odor somewhat close to the odor of pot but I don't believe that would be enough for him to search your vehicle.

jrfoxx
August 13, 2008, 11:08 AM
I'd hate to need a tin-foil hat but are we really to the point where being polite while violating you and not hassling you for legal activities is good enough?
Oh, I agree. I wasnt trying to imply that at all. I was just pointing out that it could have been worse, as they could have kept digging, REALLY hassled the OP, or decided they needed to find something to cover thier butts over the bogus "I smell pot on the paper" search when the dog found nothing. That tends to prove they were full of it, and could make some cops twitchy enough to feel the need to find something to get you for as a cover for the failed search and bogus PC. I was just trying to reach for the "silver lining" in the OP's situation. I certainly agree that the whole thing was B.S., and should not happen, nor be tolerated, and wasnt teying to imply otherwise. Maybe just didnt phrase it all that well.

Cougfan2
August 13, 2008, 11:19 AM
So the officer smelled pot on the papers, but the dog didn't hit on anything???

Time for a new cop or a better dog! :D

Biker
August 13, 2008, 11:29 AM
Yup, that was just plain wrong regardless of how nice they were.

Just because a man smiles when he hands me a bag of crap, don't mean I gotta take it.

Biker

skwab
August 13, 2008, 12:04 PM
I think most LEO's are great people, have good intentions, and really take their jobs seriously. There are, just like any profession, a percentage who don't.

case in point - and I'm sure many of you have seen this video, but as a cyclist it gets to me:



http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwkVMT6m7zg


and what's even better, the LEO stated in his official report that the cyclist was aiming for him, he tried to get out of the way but couldn't and the cyclist ran into him and knocked him down, causing the scrapes on his arm - he didn't know he was being videoed so he's on leave as they investigate.

Point is that just because someone has a badge doesn't mean they're always going to do the right thing. Be aware of your rights. I think the OP's encounter was a load of BS, a misuse of authority, and is lucky that nothing more came of it.

DocCas
August 13, 2008, 01:40 PM
It is generally understood by most competant LEOs that a "Terry" stop is limited to a 20 minute detention. Anything over that, without being able to confirm the PC for the stop, has been adjudicated as unjustified. The LEO in question in the OP either didn't know or didn't care. In either case he as no business wearing a uniform!

funkerbunny
August 13, 2008, 02:36 PM
Well I rated it as positive because they didn't take our gun, and didn't actually cuff us but now that I think about it It was kinda bad. After the dog didn't hit on anything they tore our car apart (we had lots of baggage) down to checking pockets in our shorts, checking our makeup (opening compacts and the like) and opening containers of food, then checking our engine compartment/trunk/under the car.
I get the feeling they where sure we had stuff even at the end just they couldn't find any reason to lock us up.

As for filing a complaint should we just call up the sheriff's department and give the name of the officer who stopped us (he's the only one we have a card for) ? Or should we have our attorney do this ? I am honestly worried that they will remember this and pull us over if they spot us again when we pass through there.

Treo
August 13, 2008, 02:44 PM
Have your attorney do it

KelVarnson
August 13, 2008, 02:56 PM
Do you have any reason to believe you were being profiled in any way (e.g. race, age, gender, attire/appearance)?

I'm asking more out of curiousity than anything.

Your story is kind of chilling. I do think you should follow up in some manner.

custermustache
August 13, 2008, 02:59 PM
You are lucky. I got put in jail for having a pistol in a locked secured box in my car (legal in my state) and the officer found a cigarrette roller in my glovebox. Really and truly used for rolling cigarettes. He called it "paraphernalia".

I had not paused long enough at a stop sign (he said), so he used that as pretext. Pulled me over, asked if he could search, and thinking I was not breaking any laws (I wasn't) I said "sure". I told him there was a gun in the box, secured and locked up, and once he found the roller he handcuffed me.

Cost me a $300 fine and a day in jail.
This all happened at 7am, on my way to work.

I would call the OP's encounter positive in that it didn't end like mine.

funkerbunny
August 13, 2008, 03:02 PM
Well my girlfriend was wearing her "candy" (raver beads) and we had several bumper stickers from Defcon (the security convention) on the car, stuff like EFF bumper stickers and the like.
But other than that I'm not sure if it was profiling, could have been though

eflatminor
August 13, 2008, 03:05 PM
Sue their butts! She refused a search and they did it anyway. You will win the case I suspect.

ScottyT
August 13, 2008, 03:13 PM
Wow. Not sure how anyone could interpret that encounter as "mostly positive"...

1. Why did they pull you over in the first place? Did your car/plates match a suspect's?
2. Illegal search (of the car) and seizure (car, gun, person, etc)

I hope you got a card or at least a name. At the very minimum a formal complaint needs to be made.

Water-Man
August 13, 2008, 03:16 PM
Cops lie!

FourTeeFive
August 13, 2008, 03:20 PM
Sad that just because they didn't haul you away it was a mostly positive experience. Is that what society expects from those sworn "to serve and protect"?

Rugerlvr
August 13, 2008, 03:39 PM
Not only do cops lie, it's entirely legal for them to lie to you. But just try the reverse... Watch the google videos. DONT TALK TO THE POLICE

Deanimator
August 13, 2008, 03:53 PM
Not only do cops lie, it's entirely legal for them to lie to you.
Unfortunately for the cops in question, they didn't lie to HIM. They lied to the criminal justice system. As was pointed out, they're going to have a hard time explaining why the dog didn't find anything; why they tossed the car; and why they held him for so long.

If he can identify the cops, he's got them over a barrel.

funkerbunny
August 13, 2008, 03:55 PM
Well the original reason for pulling us over is my girlfriend didnt pull into the far lane when we passed the second cop who had pulled someone else over (she would have but the first cop had us boxed in at that point so we couldnt get out of the lane we were in.


Edit: BTW Deanimator, I'm female =)

longdayjake
August 13, 2008, 03:57 PM
You don't happen to be a minority do you? I went through the academy about 3 years ago and I can tell you right now if you fit their profile they will search you every time. The reason I am not a cop right now is because of the "us vs. them" syndrome that I saw all the time. I am friends with most the cops in town, but the few that would spit on you sooner than look at you ruined it for me.

funkerbunny
August 13, 2008, 04:00 PM
we are all white, though me and my girlfriend are lesbians if that qualifies as a minority.

Deanimator
August 13, 2008, 04:02 PM
we are all white, though me and my girlfriend are lesbians if that qualifies as a minority.
It wasn't clear, but you seemed to be heading that way. Works for me. Any inappropriate sexual comment or innuendo? Every little bit helps to prove misconduct.

Bob R
August 13, 2008, 04:11 PM
though me and my girlfriend are lesbians if that qualifies as a minority.

Do you have a rainbow banner on the car, or anything at all that could suggest your sexual orientation? If you do than I would start looking at the profiling angle, seriously.

This stop was anything but positive, IMO.

Of course, I belong to the "Am I being detained, Am I free to go?" type of answer to any question crowd. I also believe they need a warrant to get inside my car.

Ever since I started to open carry here in WA my best friend has become my voice recorder.

bob

JohnBlaze
August 13, 2008, 04:14 PM
we are all white, though me and my girlfriend are lesbians if that qualifies as a minority.

...all the good ones are gay.....

:lol: jk!

Carlos Cabeza
August 13, 2008, 04:15 PM
Doesn't sound vey positive to me either. Total load of B.S. unless you were speeding, left of center, expired tag etc.......something to warrant a stop. The profiling would begin after the stop, let's say you LOOK like a pot smoker or drug smuggler, basically a dark skinned person or biker w/ long hair and tattoos & such. Absolutely a violation of your rights as a human being much less a U.S. citizen IMO. What does a pot smoker look like ?????? You just have to take a look around. A rose by any other color is still a rose.

In my experience 99.9999999% of encounters have been less than positive. The usual things, speeding tickets, burglary reports, etc. I do have one instance that warrants ;) mentioning. Out for a bike ride early one morning, open freeway, 1-ish am. I decided to get some breeze going and cracked the throttle to about a buck thirty. I usually slow when passing at that speed but didn't and lapped a white crown vic. Got lit up by Mr. Law and thought that is "go to jail" fast. After stopping the officer asked "Why in such a hurry?". I said "just out for a ride sir." I showed him my papers were legit and then He said " How do you like your bike ?, I"ve been wanting to get one of those, How fast have you had it up to ?" handed me my ID and walked back to his cruiser. As he got in he yelled "Ride Safe !"

Arrogant Bastard
August 13, 2008, 04:16 PM
As an aside, when cops are nice and make small talk, they are looking for a reason to bust you. Don't talk to them.

If I was in that position, I would be a broken record.

"Am I free to go?"
"I do not consent to this search."

Well, my feeling is making small talk is a way for them to judge whether you are behaving suspiciously. Engaging in a minor amount of polite chitchat may well save you from a lengthy delay if you can avoid tripping their suspicion.

One can be polite and still attempt to preserve the right to be free from arbitrary search.

funkerbunny
August 13, 2008, 04:23 PM
we don't have any rainbow stickers or anything like that (we steer clear of the GLBT scene/politics for the most part) but the officer did give me a weird look when I said my honey was driving (he had asked how we knew the driver).
When my honey gets home we're going to talk about this and get ahold of our lawyer.

ColinthePilot
August 13, 2008, 04:30 PM
I used to talk to cops, just trying to be friendly and put them at ease during the occasional traffic stop. I don't want the cop getting ANY feeling that I'm a threat. But then I went through some military training on interrogations(resisting them, not giving them) and saw the video on you-tube about never talking to cops without a lawyer present. I'll keep it to "Before I go for my wallet to get my DL, I'd like to let you know I have a concealed weapons permit and am carrying a pistol. how would you like to proceed?"

Rugerlvr
August 13, 2008, 04:33 PM
funkerbunny,

Your lawyer is going to tell you that it was probably an illegal search, and they probably didn't have PC, but that there's no money in suing, and it will cost you a ton to prove you were in the right.

And unless you have more money than sense, you're going to have to let it go.

And the police in question will have gotten away with violating your rights.

See AJAX22's thread here: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=300731

It appears that the LEOs lied to him about having a search warrant to search his backpack, and horribly violated his 4th Amendment rights. But his lawyer basically told him there was no point in pursuing it.

I'm sorry, but my crystal ball tells me that you will decide along the same lines.

bowl443
August 13, 2008, 05:32 PM
I don't think there is any thing to pursue here without any directly involved witnesses.

The judge will always take the cops side, always, when it comes down to your word vs theirs.

"I swear that card smelled like pot."

"Why then didn't the dog smell it?"

"His sense of smell is much greater than mine, your honor. Maybe I just had the smell confused for some cat-nip.."

This has happened to me, this has happened to others, and the cops can still say "probable cause" over any little thing.

coyotehitman
August 13, 2008, 05:58 PM
The only thing that bothers me is why would they say they smelled pot on the registration papers? None of us smoke pot and I'm left with the feeling that they lied so they could search the car. (is this common when you refuse a search?) Anyways, other than delaying us a few hours, things worked out pretty well I think.

Maybe they smelled pot on the papers, maybe they thought they smelled pot on the papers, maybe they lied about smelling pot on the papers...you will never know. I would like to think it is one of the first two though.

They did not need probable cause to conduct a free air sniff of your vehicle, so I do not see reason for fabrication here.

Are you sure you were delayed a few hours...not 20-30 minutes that felt like a few hours?

What is normal is to either secure consent, have probable cause to search and to conduct said search, or to have a K9 conduct a sniff, get PC or not, and conduct a search or let you go. Your version of what transpired seems out of the ordinary.

Cars do not get stopped because of a desire to search them. What was the specific reason for the stop, were you cited, etc.?

Most of the posts I see on THR about this type of thing seem to be twisted, contorted, and spiced up to make the LEO look like a maniac and the poster look like a patron saint who has been violated beyond belief. No offense, but I question whether everything that occurred was included in the original post; just too many thing that make me raise an eyebrow.

Blakenzy
August 13, 2008, 05:58 PM
The War on Drugs, keeping us safe and our streets squeaky clean... we surely can't allow pesky rights to get in the way :rolleyes:

funkerbunny
August 13, 2008, 06:08 PM
coyotehitman: We are definatly not saints nor do we look "normal", we where not cited for failing to switch lanes when we passed the second cop. As for how long it took, My girlfriend looked at the clock and verified it had been wayy over an hour (I'll ask her the specifics when she gets home.
If I had to guess why we got the treatment we did I would say it was a combination of the Defcon bumperstickers and my girlfriends Raver beads (even in my mind when I see them I connect them with drugs)
But in short that was everything from my point of view, if you would like I can have my honey look at the post to make sure I didnt forget anything. =)

coyotehitman
August 13, 2008, 06:46 PM
It looks like there was PC for the stop, PC for the search (If the LEO is not lying), and a K9 used (which doesn't require PC), then a detailed search which revealed a firearm and ammunition and some other indicators that may be common to those who use drugs, along with not "looking normal" which may or may not be common to a drug user. Depending on how much stuff you had to sift through, and how long it took to run and get a return on your OL's, tags, and the firearm, everything may well be by the book here. I understand it seemed overly intrusive to you, though, because it delayed your trip.

Treo
August 13, 2008, 06:57 PM
Bad Treo, no donut.

Wait, I'm not a cop I'm a security guard I don't get donuts.

Bad Treo, no pop-tart

romeo212000
August 13, 2008, 07:03 PM
Officers have to say that in order to search your car without permission, If you oppose them in court it is your word against a uniformed officer. Who will they believe?

csmkersh
August 13, 2008, 07:39 PM
Hardly a positive stop. What they did is called abuse of authority. You should have filed a complaint. Possible Terry Stop violation.

SomeKid
August 13, 2008, 07:52 PM
If your lawyer says it won't be worth suing over, hunt for a new lawyer, or if you must, use the ACLU.

Being lesbians, some homosexual groups may use you as poster girls, but at least you will get to slam some bad cops.

Oh, and arrogant, you never saw the video where the lawyer details very well why it is NEVER safe to talk police, did you?

RobNDenver
August 13, 2008, 07:59 PM
OK, If I read this correctly, the OP indicated that the ECSO pulled over two cars on I-70 and engaged in the vehicular version of knock and talk. Funkerbunny's GF did not get a ticket and the cops engaged in a pretext search which would never have stood up.

Coyotehitman . . "Cars do not get stopped because of a desire to search them. What was the specific reason for the stop, were you cited, etc.?"

I searched plenty of cars when I was a street cop, because I felt like it. Cars get stopped all the time because cops are engaged in fishing expeditions, they don't like the look of the occupants, the time of the day, the time of the month. . . This was a bull**** search, and there is nothing that is going to persuade me otherwise.

Reyn
August 13, 2008, 08:11 PM
This was a bull**** search, and there is nothing that is going to persuade me otherwise

You have come to this conclusion based on an internet post where you are getting one side of a story from a stranger.

Orthonym
August 14, 2008, 05:40 AM
... and the RIAA, and the MPAA...

I suppose you've heard about the Federal injunction the clueless Boston Transit guys got against the folks from MIT who pointed out the cluelessly-hopeless security in their "smart" cards at the most recent DEFCON?

It's been discussed at the Volokh Conspiracy, at length.

Headless
August 14, 2008, 08:27 AM
Wow. If this is considered a mostly positive encounter, i think it speaks volumes about the state of things in this country. As for coyothitman saying that having firearms being a valid reason to think someone is dealing drugs... what the hell? Are you on drugs? Do you own firearms? I suppose that because some murderers own firearms, if you pull someone over and they have a gun in their car they are likely a murderer? Some rapists use knives to intimidate their victims, so if you pull someone over and they've got a knife, they're probably a rapist? Some gangbangers use baseball bats to beat a victim to death, so if you pull someone over who has a baseball bat in their car they're probably a gangbanger?

coyotehitman
August 14, 2008, 08:45 AM
I searched plenty of cars when I was a street cop, because I felt like it. Cars get stopped all the time because cops are engaged in fishing expeditions, they don't like the look of the occupants, the time of the day, the time of the month. . . This was a bull**** search, and there is nothing that is going to persuade me otherwise.

You have come to this conclusion based on an internet post where you are getting one side of a story from a stranger.

Thank you Reyn. +1

RobnDenver, if you have any police experience, the fact that the OP added more to the story when I questioned the facts should raise an eyebrow. Furthermore, cars get stopped for cause or reasonable articulable suspicion. Fishing expeditions are absolutely fine as long as their foundation includes one of the above.

If the OP feels wronged, file a complaint, file a civil action. I hope you tell the truth and divulge all pertinent facts, though. And I hope you have the ethical integrity not to make this an issue of sexual orientation, unless it was actually an issue of sexual orientation.

Kentak
August 14, 2008, 08:53 AM
I haven't read all three pages yet.

What was the reason for the traffic stop?

And, what's positive about being delayed on your trip and having your car tossed?

K

Matt G
August 14, 2008, 11:18 AM
I'm disturbed by the lack of critical thinking here. The assumption by the majority of those who chose to post here is that, if the anonymous poster here says that she had no marijuana on her, then the police officers lied.

Really? That's the ONLY answer?

Other very real possibilities that I can think of, which don't involve a cop risking his career and a felony indictment over a fishing expedition would be:


The officer was simply mistaken.
There had at one time been marijuana next to the registration papers, but not on that date.
The prior owners of the used car had used the glove box as a marijuana storage area (stupid, but surprisingly common), and the smell permiated the glove box fabric lining, and the dash insulation, so that papers left in the glove box for a long time would become imbued with the sent. (Common with backpacks used to carry pot-- you can't ever get that sent out, it seems.)
Our anonymous poster is not conveying all of the facts to us correctly,whether intentionally or otherwise.


Truthfully, I tend to feel that Occam's razor shows that the greater liklihood falls in the above 4 possibilities, rather than "the cops lied," given the severe ramifications of lying to conduct a fishing expedition. While I'm certain that there are cops out there that do lie to conduct searches, it's amazingly stupid, when you consider the danger to their carreers, their credibility, and their freedom. I can tell you with a clear conscience that I don't personally know of a single cop who will lie to perform a search. And if I did, I'd personally do what I could to put them in prison for it.

There are indeed terrible instances of criminals wearing police uniforms. But they're not police officers, anymore; they're just criminals who haven't been busted yet. I'm so very sorry, and angry, that those "officers" work, that I cannot express my sorrow. But know that they're NOT the norm. I couldn't put on the uniform if it were so.

I don't view the Fourth Amendment as a horrible obstacle to my job that some ACLU lawyers threw in my way; I see it and all of he other rights recognized by the U.S. Constitution as a necessary tool that protects our citizenry and myself more thoroughly than my pistol ever could.

realmswalker
August 14, 2008, 11:53 AM
I was just curious as to why the OP said no to a search. I don't see why, if you have nothing to hide, you would say no to a search. I know some people believe it's an infringement of rights, but just saying yes and being on your way gets you out of their a lot faster than saying no.

It also eases the officer and makes him more all around friendly.

Treo
August 14, 2008, 12:04 PM
I was just curious as to why the OP said no to a search. I don't see why, if you have nothing to hide, you would say no to a search.

Yeah I mean after all it's not like any cop has ever planted evidence right?

How about the OP refused the search because that's her SOP ?
I would never consent to a search of my vehicle and I haven't used marijuana since 1982.

Rugerlvr
August 14, 2008, 12:13 PM
Living in Utah, I will say that I-70 between Cali and Colorado is a huge drug pipeline. Huge.

The Tourist
August 14, 2008, 12:19 PM
If the officer has legitimate probable cause he can get a warrant.

I'll wait. I'm retired.

Deanimator
August 14, 2008, 01:15 PM
I would never consent to a search of my vehicle and I haven't used marijuana since 1982.
I've NEVER used illegal drugs, nor abused prescription or over the counter drugs and I would NEVER consent to ANY search, EVER.

Whatever I lose from a false arrest I will get back 100,000 fold in written complaints and civil litigation. It'd be worth it just to see the tortfeasors in question groveling in an utterly futile search for mercy from someone totally lacking in it.

Deanimator
August 14, 2008, 01:35 PM
I was just curious as to why the OP said no to a search. I don't see why, if you have nothing to hide, you would say no to a search. I know some people believe it's an infringement of rights, but just saying yes and being on your way gets you out of their a lot faster than saying no.

It also eases the officer and makes him more all around friendly.
The only thing more foolish in a police encounter than being needlessly belligerent is to consent to ANY searches and to engage in unnecessary conversation.

Memorize:

After providing any identification requested and LAWFULLY REQUIRED to be provided by you (name and address, driver's license and proof of insurance if driving, license or permit if carrying a firearm and such is required):

"I do NOT consent to ANY searches, Officer."

"I do NOT speak to the police without a lawyer present, Officer."

"Am I free to leave, Officer?"

(If the answer to the above question is "no":)
"If I am not free to leave, Officer, am I under arrest? Of what crime am I suspected"?

"Please have a field supervisor brought to this location immediately, Officer."

Repeat as necessary and say NOTHING else.

Officers don't need to be "eased". They need to obey the law. You need to do everything practicable to protect yourself in the event that they do not.

Deanimator
August 14, 2008, 01:52 PM
Truthfully, I tend to feel that Occam's razor shows that the greater liklihood falls in the above 4 possibilities, rather than "the cops lied," given the severe ramifications of lying to conduct a fishing expedition. While I'm certain that there are cops out there that do lie to conduct searches, it's amazingly stupid, when you consider the danger to their carreers, their credibility, and their freedom. I can tell you with a clear conscience that I don't personally know of a single cop who will lie to perform a search. And if I did, I'd personally do what I could to put them in prison for it.
There are places where there are NO "ramifications" to a police officer lying, nevermind "severe" ones. Lying to justify warrantless searches or indeed to obtain search warrants is only "stupid" if there's a reasonable likelihood that:

1. The officer doing so will be caught.

2. Anyone in a position of authority will care IF he's caught.

3. There will be any meaningful negative consequences for the misconduct once it's discovered.

You just need to read a Chicago newspaper to see that there are places in this country where NONE of those things is likely. In a place where (at best) a criminally negligent homicide is "punished" with a 30 day suspension, why should I think that somebody's going to be in hot water for lying to justify a warrantless search in the street? There are places where the ONLY meaningful check on officer behavior is the civil courts. It's unfortunate, but it's the truth.

Matt G
August 14, 2008, 01:54 PM
Dean, that's all pretty good advice that I certainly would take no umbrage at hearing if I were the investigating officer.

However, I would point out that, in a lot of jurisdictions, the officer who stops you may well be the ONLY officer on duty at that time in his department. Thus, he is the "field supervisor," per se. It's important to be aware that the officer is not just being obstinate when he says "that's not possible," when the driver asks for a field supervisor. Also, simply because the driver demands one and there is a field supervisor on duty, the supervisor is not duty bound to drop what he's doing to come render customer service to an irate citizen. He may actually have other serious duties that he can't leave.

Keeping this on topic, I do notice that the officer was reported as being polite and not overly interested in the shotgun. If he respected her rights under the 2nd Amendment, why do we automatically assume that he trampled her 4th Amendment rights?

XDKingslayer
August 14, 2008, 01:59 PM
I was just curious as to why the OP said no to a search. I don't see why, if you have nothing to hide, you would say no to a search.

Because I don't want evidence planted in my vehicle.

Because I've got better things to do other than sitting in the hot sun on the side of the road while Barney Fife uses my vehicle for his fishing expedition.

Because I have better things to do than sitting on the side of the road for ANOTHER hour putting my crap back in my vehicle because Barney was mad he didn't find anything.

Because I don't want Barney fiddling with the gun I always have in my vehicle. Chances are he doesn't know the gun laws and doesn't know me keeping a loaded gun in my center console is perfectly legal.

Because it's my damn right to refuse a search.

caseypj
August 14, 2008, 02:02 PM
Because I don't want evidence planted in my vehicle.

Because I've got better things to do other than sitting in the hot sun on the side of the road while Barney Fife uses my vehicle for his fishing expedition.

Because I have better things to do than sitting on the side of the road for ANOTHER hour putting my crap back in my vehicle because Barney was mad he didn't find anything.

Because I don't want Barney fiddling with the gun I always have in my vehicle. Chances are he doesn't know the gun laws and doesn't know me keeping a loaded gun in my center console is perfectly legal.

Because it's my damn right to refuse a search.

I don't think you'll have any problems with the CCSO, I've never had an issue with them.

Intune
August 14, 2008, 02:57 PM
I was just curious as to why the OP said no to a search. I don't see why, if you have nothing to hide, you would say no to a search. I know some people believe it's an infringement of rights, but just saying yes and being on your way gets you out of their a lot faster than saying no.

It also eases the officer and makes him more all around friendly.
:what: :barf:
I don't give a rat's toochas if a consensual search will "ease" the officer and he/she better be professional & courteous. I don't need new "friends." They are public servants.

The cop then informs us that even though my girlfriend refused a search they will be searching because they "smelled pot on her registration papers" Hmm...
"I know some people believe it's an infringement of rights..."
Ya think? Since when do cops ASK to do something when they have probable cause? They don't. They TELL you what they're gonna do. You don't have a choice in the matter.

This one smells worse than her papers supposedly did.

So we get out of the car, and watch for a good hour and a half... "... just saying yes and being on your way gets you out of their a lot faster than saying no."

Hmm... Really? By what, say ten seconds or so? Like, say, the time it took for the officer to realize that she had a clue of her rights and that the papers he had been in possession of for x amount of time suddenly wafted of herb?

Please.

I would have driven straight to the police station, walked up to the desk and said, "I want to turn myself in."
"For what?'
"Smell these registration papers."
"Smells like paper."
"I'd like to speak to your Captain, Chief, watch commander, cleaning lady or whoever the heck is running this dog & pony show you call a department."

:banghead:

Treo
August 14, 2008, 03:16 PM
? Since when do cops ASK to do something when they have probable cause? They don't.

Not always, even if a cop has probable cause if he gets your consent to search the search is legal period.

I wouldn't give consent if they showed up W/ a warrant, I wouldn't resist, but I'd state very clearly that they were searching W/ out my consent.

while Barney Fife uses my vehicle for his fishing expedition.

No need to be rude, polite but firm.

Officer I do not consent to any searches.

Officer I do not wish to make any statement W/out my attorney present.

Not rude polite and firm

funkerbunny
August 14, 2008, 03:21 PM
Wow, alot of different views. As for why we refused a search there are numerous reasons such as 1: I really do not enjoy strangers handling my dirty undies 2: we had tons of sensitive electronics in the car (laptops, antennas, drives, etc) and 3: Well its our right to and we chose to exercise it.

Now for all you naysayers who for some reason think I'm twisting the truth I have to ask two things. First why would I lie about this in an attempt to make the officers look bad when I originally wrote this thread as a mostly positive experience ? And second, if they smelled pot on the papers why then did the dog not hit on the glovebox or anything else in our car ? (we can be sure they did not find drugs due to my not being in jail)

Deanimator
August 14, 2008, 03:22 PM
Dean, that's all pretty good advice that I certainly would take no umbrage at hearing if I were the investigating officer.

However, I would point out that, in a lot of jurisdictions, the officer who stops you may well be the ONLY officer on duty at that time in his department. Thus, he is the "field supervisor," per se. It's important to be aware that the officer is not just being obstinate when he says "that's not possible," when the driver asks for a field supervisor. Also, simply because the driver demands one and there is a field supervisor on duty, the supervisor is not duty bound to drop what he's doing to come render customer service to an irate citizen. He may actually have other serious duties that he can't leave.
If the officer is on the up and up, there should be no need for a supervisor. If he asks me if he can search, and I in turn say no, refuse to engage in small talk and he tells me I can go, I don't see a reason to pursue things, at least on the face of it.

On the other hand, if he tells me I'm not free to leave, or he searches without consent, RAS or PC, or threatens me with violence, "charges" me with something that's not a crime, etc., I'm going to request a supervisor, and for a number of reasons. First, he may be reluctant to commit criminal acts in front of a witness. Secondly, even if the supervisor doesn't do his duty, the more stories that have to match, the better. That supervisor may not be willing to fall on his own sword to protect the officer.

As as I noted, a lot of this is highly contextual. I'm going to stick with my rules of thumb, no matter where I get stopped. No searches, no probing conversations. Am I free to leave? In Chicago, I'm going to be hyper-vigilant because I know beyond a doubt that I HAVE to be. I'm not stopping anywhere there are no witnesses. I'm looking for places likely to be covered by video cameras. If I feel I need to and can do so without being physically harmed, I'll dial 911 to create a record of where and when things are happening. You might think this excessive, but if you do, you don't know the Chicago PD. I can't imagine this would be necessary with the Rocky River PD. I doubt it's necessary with your PD.

Intune
August 14, 2008, 03:29 PM
... if they smelled pot on the papers why then did the dog not hit on the glovebox or anything else in our car? Um, 'cause dogs aren't devious or dishonest? :scrutiny:

I imagine you were ready to get the heck outta there after this exemplary treatment on the side of the road but how in the world did you resist asking for Rex to sniff the papers?

deadon
August 14, 2008, 03:40 PM
"smelled pot on her registration papers"

Doesn't sound like he needed dogs if he can smell pot on the registration papers.

Mike Franklin
August 14, 2008, 03:53 PM
I'm trying to remember a positive post about any LAOs on this site?
I do remember many posts asking how the Law can be circumvinted.
I do recall a post about how people who report crimes are 'snitches'.
I do recall people being told to violate the Law.
I do constantly read about supposed abuses by LEOs, which don't result in complaints.


Doesn't say much for this forum.

Intune
August 14, 2008, 04:02 PM
Doesn't say much for this forum. Yet your post speaks volumes.

Oleg & the Mods run a tight ship, PARTICULARLY when there is a hint or suggestion of breaking a law. ANY LAW. Please, kind Sir, cite some examples.

Would you care to comment regarding the original post & how well the stop was conducted? From either viewpoint?

Deanimator
August 14, 2008, 04:02 PM
I'm trying to remember a positive post about any LAOs on this site?
I do remember many posts asking how the Law can be circumvinted.
I do recall a post about how people who report crimes are 'snitches'.
I do recall people being told to violate the Law.
I do constantly read about supposed abuses by LEOs, which don't result in complaints.


Doesn't say much for this forum.
Either you aren't looking closely, or you're being less than candid.

I'm frequently critical of police. I've praised the Berea, Ohio police on multiple occasions. Why? Because for the most part they don't steal, don't torture suspects, don't kidnap people, don't commit home invasions, don't beat up women, and will actually do things they're not required to do in order to uphold the public trust.

Those are things I would NEVER say about the Chicago Police Department, simply because I'd be lying if I did.

I'm willing to tell the truth about a department of which people can be proud. Are you willing to tell the truth about departments which mostly bring shame to their communities?

Intune
August 14, 2008, 04:17 PM
I do constantly read about supposed abuses by LEOs, which don't result in complaints.
MF, please put yourself in the OP's place for that stop in your brand-new 100% non-dope-tainted car and the officer pulls this on you. Would you lodge a formal complaint? How should she go about doing it?

Thanks for the positive help on behalf of all law-abiding LEO's & the public they serve.

:evil:

The Tourist
August 14, 2008, 04:20 PM
This debate seems to be breaking down into two distinct sides.

One side, they will use their enumerated rights even if means bracelets from Barney Fife. The Framers faced nooses, don't track mud on their sacrifices.

The other side doesn't want to be bothered. "Hey, I've got a cricket match about two-ish and Buffy needs her nails done..."

If half of this crap would have happened to me I'd be calling the City County Building and my attorney.

Remember, the arrest means nothing. It only means bracelets, a ride in a Crown Victoria, fingerprinting (they use those new computer thingies, it's really cool), a call to your wife, a lousy breakfast and a few hands of gin rummy with a bunch of townie idiots.

It's the trial that's important. And something like this will never get past the DA.

Keep your mouth shut the entire time. The first words to the DA are, "Fruits of the poison tree." Then tell him about the civil hearing and your plans for the new house.

Treo
August 14, 2008, 04:22 PM
do remember many posts asking how the Law can be circumvinted.

I've seen those threads too, they get locked QUICK

I do recall a post about how people who report crimes are 'snitches'.

I'd like to see a cite please

I do recall people being told to violate the Law

Can't argue W/ that one it happens every time we get a " should I carry at XYZ " thread

Rugerlvr
August 14, 2008, 04:28 PM
...and this thread seems to be degenerating into a bunch of meta-topic argument.

Let's get it back on topic. If not, let's zip it.

The Tourist
August 14, 2008, 04:30 PM
Oh, I forgot to add one thing. Never even speak to a mall ninja. I'd talk to a townie first.

They don't know much about the law. They cannot touch you. They cannot detain you. Pretend they are invisible. Until they touch you.

They have as much power as my Aunt Clara.

Carlos Cabeza
August 14, 2008, 04:39 PM
Treo,
The "snichtes" thread was closed for being OT, and there were references made to encourage the reporting of a crime. It is such a tacky word and IIRC "doin the right thing" was suggested to replace it.

I have been stopped and asked "any drugs or guns in the vehicle" I answered "NO!" though there were guns and drugs in the car. I didn't want to suffer the loss of my valuable time at the hands of a bored policeman. Both guns and drugs were legally held so why waste our time ? He did let me drive away.....

Tourista, aren't they "professionals" too, Just not "as professional".

Treo
August 14, 2008, 04:55 PM
Tourista, aren't they "professionals" too, Just not "as professional".

Pay no attention to the man behind the computer.

The Tourist got into it w/ a security guard at a mall and ended up taking a bath in the mall fountain. Thats why he takes every oppurtunity he can to hide behind his computer and snipe at them now.

FLA2760
August 14, 2008, 07:41 PM
Were you speeding, make a lane change without a directional, following too close? Drift from your lane?Window tint? What I am getting at is why were you stopped in the first place? Were you profiled? The profiling can be based on many things including out of state tags. I agree this was a bad stop and the only good is that you were not arrested. I am pro LEO but there are bad ones out there too.

funkerbunny
August 14, 2008, 10:22 PM
FLA2760:
Well the original reason for pulling us over is my girlfriend didnt pull into the far lane when we passed the second cop who had pulled someone else over (she would have but the first cop had us boxed in at that point so we couldnt get out of the lane we were in.

The Tourist
August 14, 2008, 11:03 PM
ended up taking a bath in the mall fountain

Then why is his patch sewn to my colors?

All mall ninjas are posers. Otherwise they would still be in the police academy.

http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb231/TheTourist_bucket/DSC00329.jpg

Old Dog
August 14, 2008, 11:48 PM
Because I don't want evidence planted in my vehicle.Oh, yeah ... I always worry about that, too. It's a well known internet fact that all traffic cops, deputy sheriffs and state troopers always keep some spare dope or stolen guns on them just to plant in the vehicles of those unfortunates they pull over. Geez, how else are cops gonna get any entertainment on the job and create hours and hours of stupid paperwork to do?

Because I've got better things to do other than sitting in the hot sun on the side of the road while Barney Fife uses my vehicle for his fishing expedition.Yep, me too, that's why I actually obey traffic laws so as to avoid getting pulled over by those rogue traffic cops. 'Course, then we got them Florida cops who create reasons to pull law-abiding folk over ...
Because I have better things to do than sitting on the side of the road for ANOTHER hour putting my crap back in my vehicle because Barney was mad he didn't find anything.
Another well known internet fact: LEOs really, really hate it when they don't find any "evidence" and thus end up not having to do hours of paperwork at the end of their shift ... that's just so annoying ...
Because I don't want Barney fiddling with the gun I always have in my vehicle. Chances are he doesn't know the gun laws and doesn't know me keeping a loaded gun in my center console is perfectly legal.
Gosh, you folks on the internet are really sharp! Y'all are on on to that little known truth that all LEOs use those pesky classes on their states' firearms laws as the only time ya can catch a little shut-eye during the academy or inservice training ... After all, no LEO really needs to actually know any laws ... we have the internet!
Because it's my damn right to refuse a search.Well, ya got me there ... who's responsible for that pesky Constitution thingie, anyway?

Some of you guys really, really crack me up sometimes.

Treo
August 14, 2008, 11:54 PM
Then why is his patch sewn to my colors?

Interesting in Colorado Security Guards are required to where a patch that specifically identifies them as private security. ( off course you can buy one of those patches at any flee market) names the company they work for. And it expressedly can not have the word police on it.

Of course there's also the tendency for S/Os to work W/ partners.

All in all I'm having a very hard time believing that you beat up an agent of the owners of the mall and just walked away W/ no charges filed.

Could you provide some proof ( that can't be purchased at a flea market ) that this actually happened

The Tourist
August 14, 2008, 11:57 PM
Old Dog, one of the things that bother me the most about these threads is that the people with the least knowledge are always the biggest blowhards.

Your absolutely right, most cops are honest and do not carry dope and "drop guns" to fake evidence. They don't have do. A dedicated officer playing by the rules, developing circumstances for an arrest doesn't need to violate enumerated rights.

And let me get one thing out of the way. In the first half of my life I wasn't exactly a choir boy. Having said that, the ones which I ran afoul, and the cop who arrested me for CCW, LT. Gary Moore, were some of the most professional.

LT Moore was so professional I hired him.

I am proud of the relationship I now have with the LEOs of Dane County. Several weeks ago I called the locals to my home for two unrelated matters. Stand up kind of guys, all of them.

As always, it's the chairborne rangers and posers who generate the most wind.

The Tourist
August 14, 2008, 11:59 PM
Treo, this is why I don't believe a thing you say.

You obviously don't know bikers, the 1960's, and the concept of colors.

I do think you see Bruce Wayne when you look into the mirror.:D

Huddog
August 15, 2008, 12:08 AM
Sorry about your encounter. More sorry that some people on the thread think all LEOs are "out to get" innocent people, because God knows there are not enough bad guys out there to get without "planting evidence." By the way "profiling" is definately illegal.

The Tourist
August 15, 2008, 12:23 AM
Treo, to give you an honest answer, and I'll try to make this so simple even you'll understand, a club member's colors are to be considered his rolling resume' of the events and times in which he rode.

As Biker or Bikerdoc can testify, any event or toursit attraction has a pin or patch of that year or era. For example, the first fifty sets of colors of my club were handmade by a little old lady named Betty Lou, or Betty Sue. There were fifty because she gave our president Bob Smith a deal on that quantity. Mine is one of those fifty sets.

The emblems and rockers which came after that were machine-made with a slightly different design. This fact alone demonstrates the years I patched and rode.

Emblems don't have to be macho, but they signify some importance to the biker. Many bikers wear Red Cross medals. Or pins from the cities in which they have traveled.

I have known my wife for almost 40 years. As a young girl, she was a Girl Scout who vacationed at a Wisconsin resort called "Camp Go Seek." Our Adventist church later bought that property. She had the old camp patch in her things, and she sewed that patch to my colors.

Some items were gifts, some trophies, some designate my entrance to activities like "The Pork Patrol."

If you were connected to any aspect of law enforcement you would have known this stuff from the bikers and cops in your area.

I also have a 'cannabis sativa' patch on my colors. I suppose you also want me to find that receipt, as well.

Treo
August 15, 2008, 12:29 AM
Treo, this is why I don't believe a thing you say.

You obviously don't know bikers, the 1960's, and the concept of colors.

I do think you see Bruce Wayne when you look into the mirror

(IOW) No, you can't prove it .
Thanks

BTW of all the people on this board who's concept of me I'm worried about, you aint it.

The Tourist
August 15, 2008, 12:42 AM
Treo, I mean this sincerely. You're pride and your ego are far too wrapped up in the idea that you are connected to law enforcement. Look, many of us freely admit we're just neighborhood guys. I'm retired, I drive an eleven year old truck.

I have called your credentials into question. In turn, you seriously expect me to find a torn 30 year old sleeve. Somehow, this validates your claims.

No one, and I mean no one, is going to lose respect for you if you tell the truth. In fact, we'd have more respect for you if you dropped the pretense.

Like I told hso on a telephone call, the hardest thing I ever did was to hunt down all of the people I had wronged or lied to, admit my guilt and offer an apology. I could only do two people per night. I would have rather been kicked by a townie.

But, guy, you don't know about history, law, procedure and the statutes of your own state--available on a simple google. If this thread does anything perhaps it will show our true high road.

I'm holding my hand out to you here.

KelVarnson
August 15, 2008, 12:50 AM
Wow, we've got quite a cat fight going here. Before the thread gets locked, I wanna read about this fountain story. Can someone give me a link or something? Sounds amusing, at least.

And to the OP, any updates? Did your girlfriend remind you of anything you left out of the story?

Orthonym
August 15, 2008, 12:54 AM
I still think it was the DEFCON sticker. Y'know, "Dirty Hippy Hackers!"

How I miss the Huntsville, Alabama parachute club from the early seventies! We had students like me, we had dirty hippies, we had scary "special" Army types, we had NASA engineers, we had a guy who was on the board of the FAI.

We all got along just fine.

P.s. That was about the time of the D.B. Cooper thing. The USPA magazine had an ad in it from the FBI, asking us to turn the guy in, if we knew him. To a man, and woman, we decided, uh, no.

The Tourist
August 15, 2008, 12:59 AM
Don't go making a big deal of this. I'm not even mad at Treo.

But I think there's a very positive principle at work here. We're supposed to be "the high road." I admit, I'm a fudd, but opportunities should be used to pass on some info and some life lessons.

I've even had PMs with a mod who proffered there were many posers.

One of the life lessons I can teach is the idea of lying. It's not just as simple as trying to impress a girl at a saloon. As you age you find truth in the old adage that "killing kills the killer." I hurt no one but myself.

In the movie "The White Buffalo," one of the side stories deals with a Native American who has lost his honor. The tribe says that he must call himself "worm" until his debt is paid.

I took that to heart. For many years my forum handle was "Ichabod Poser." As an student of the Bible can tell you, "Ichabod" means "God has left him."

Don't just smirk and say that it's just the internet and "I'm just having fun." It broke me down to tears to find the people I had wronged.

Matt G
August 15, 2008, 05:53 AM
How did this thread manage to degenerate so far?

Good Gawd.

Closed.

If you enjoyed reading about "Mostly Positive LEO encounter" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!