Great Video-It will drive most here nuts!

Status
Not open for further replies.
That is a good question raised in the other thread, does the state have the right to search someones property without a warrant if it is a health violation?

I wonder what the founding fathers would have thought about that?
 
She is a County/municipal inspector who is looking for non compliant violations on the property. She does not need a warrant to go onto this guys property. Though, I do not know Indiana state law, it should be similar to other states, in that the County/municipality is allowed to check up on any construction, or unsafe acts on his property that is in clear violation of local codes. The Deputy should have know this. Also we don't have any information about the reason why she was called out to the property. It seems the homeowner is intentionally not telling us the whole story. This guy has no legal standing and if he brings his case to court it would be dismissed.

I should add that the Inspector should not just walk on this guys property. It might be allowed but she should have had at least explained in detail why she was there.
 
Last edited:
Um so let's see the slippery slope here. I need to search inside your house for "health" reasons. I need to "condemn" these guns for health reasons. You need to be involuntarily put in a "hospital" for health reasons. Yeah go ahead and defend those public officials some more.
 
I need to search inside your house for "health" reasons. I need to "condemn" these guns for health reasons. You need to be involuntarily put in a "hospital" for health reasons. Yeah go ahead and defend those public officials some more.
Click to expand...

Actually they can come into your house if there is clear health or safety violation. Committing a person is different. You should check up on the codes, and laws in your area. You might not like it but that is the way it is. The laws are usually created to allow local government officials to access property in certain situations. If you don't like it help change the laws in your area.
 
Last edited:
Either way I dont like when cops say "If you dont have anything to hide then what are you so worried about"


LEAVE ME THE HELL ALONE!
 
If this whole thing is about a Septic tank inspection then what is the big issue with this guy? Unless he is trying to hide other violations or non approved construction from the inspector. This makes me suspicious of him. I knew a guy from Boston who moved to the country. He thought the state wetlands conservation laws did not apply to his property. He rented a excavator and dug out a swamp on his property to build a fish pond without even contacting the local Wetlands Conservation board. When the board heard about him, they swiftly shut him down. It was not pretty. He almost lost his property, and ended up with heavy fines, and had to repair the damage he did to the swamp. Lessen learned don't mess with the Government.
 
Special Needs

The U.S Supreme court has ruled that there are six brightline exceptions to the search warrant rule. Those are...

1. Stop and Frisk
2. Search Incident to arrest
3. Consent
4. Exegent circumstances
5. Motorvehicle exception
6. Special needs beyond law enforcement

I think that this scenario would probably fall under number 6, and possible number 4.
Special needs beyond law enforcement has been recognized to be code enforcement, security a safety enforcement of educational institutions, and basically anything else where the purpose is not for criminal prosecution. Now, depending on what the health inspector was there to investigate, it might fall under exigent circumstances. If they health department could show they have reason to believe (not probable cause) that the resident was committing some safety/health code violation, they could definately (according to the U.S Supreme Court) enter the property.

Here's something else to throw in your chain. Because that inspector encountered resistance from the home owner, which caused her to fear for her safety to where she needed police escort to enter the property. The Deputy could have accompanied her on the property. Then ANYTHING that the deputy could see that he knew was subject to seizure, he could sieze. Also, anything he saw that could lead to probable cause to search the premisis and/or the home, he then could have used as articulable facts to bring to a judge to issue a search/arrest warrant.

Pretty crappy, but that's the way it is folks.
 
If you look closely you can see what looks like a seasonal stream when he is following the inspector. Then you can see what looks like a septic/drainfield installation right next to it between the tractor and the trailer. In most places that is a no no. If he had a permit to install a septic system then he automatically gave permission for that septic system to be inspected. Another case of someone trying to hide shady/questionable behavior behind the constitution.
 
cbs, yes, people move outside cities and then think they are a law unto themselves and they have no duties to anyone beyond themselves.

Some sort of self-centeredness sets into them. "My property, my property, my property.":rolleyes: No, let's talk about your duty not to allow filth unto anyone else's property.

Sort of like gun owners. Yammer continually about "my rights" but when you discuss duties--to train, to obey The Four Rules, to make a civilized appearance in public--you hear nothing but crickets. Ahhh, the crickets.
 
So get a search warrent! Just because you work for the governemnt doesn't mean you are above the law. If there was an urgent problem, that INSPECTOR could easily have gotten the warrent the day before when she was first told of the Bill of Rights.

The deputiy is a waste of a nice uniform. If he knows anything about the law he would have taken the 'lady' to a judge to get a warrent before going out there.

Just because the property owner sounds like a bit of a nut case does not remove his rights as a citizen.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"My property, my property, my property".

obx, what if no warrant is needed for her entry onto his property? Notwithstanding the Open Fields Doctrine, the Indiana Supreme Court has held, as many other state courts, that warrantless inspection can be permissible as long as there is a substantial government interest, the warrantless inspection is necessary to further the regulatory scheme and the inspection program (in terms of certainity and regulaity) provided a substitute.

Haven't you ever re-modeled your home and the city inspector came over to sign off on everything being up to code? Alcazar del Tejon has been subjected to several admin inspections to ensure that I was up to code when I redid my electric (up it to 225 amps) or my sidewalks and curbs (the guy never got out of his truck when he came to look at them I'm told), inter alia.

Those are admin inspections. Done to a specific governmental interest that is necessary to further a regulatory scheme and it was done openly and part of the building permit process. If this was a septic tank, then I would assume that this is what she was doing?

1. It is a right against "unreasonable" search and seizure.

2. Your property, property, property rights end when you impact others. I have a duty to ensure that my power or my sidewalks do not hurt others. He has a duty to ensure that his filth does not affect his neighbors.

It is always a balance between rights and duties. Given the limited purpose of her entry onto his land to inspect the septic (note not the dwelling, that raises a whole bunch of other issues) in a quick manner, I do not foresee a lawsuit here but will wait and see.

Not meaning to snap at anyone, it's just that the whole "my property, my property, my property" refrain is making me nuts around the 4th. Little hoodlums keeping me up at night shooting off fireworks until the small hours and then I complain to the banjo parents who give me the "my property" refrain. Also got it in Indianapolis over the 4th where hilljacks were setting off fireworks in public in a large gathering. "It's public property, I can do what I want" as they set off roman candles around grandmothers and children. I'd horsewhip them all and send the lot of them back down South.

Just in a bad mood and this "I can do what I want regardless of its impact on others" is growing tiresome, sorry.:)
 
Last edited:
El T I've gotta say I love it when the rest of the story enters the picture. One of my best friends is a "Law talkin Guy" too, and its fun to hear peoples reactions, ala the crickets.
 
She sez 'I'm from the gobermint and I'm coming in.' He sez 'No way!'

We have the legal system in place to take care of this type of disagreement. Go to a judge, show probable cause, get a warrant!

While I am glad this gentleman is not my neighbor, he still deserves the same protection under the Constitution as we are required to give to drug dealers and meth lab operators.
 
Davo, right, it would be one thing if the health inspector entered his home or a barn or toolshed, something that was not related to the septic.

With rights come duties. You have a right to own your land and enjoy it peacefully, however with that right comes the duty to ensure that you do not harm others.

As long as the inspection was done only to review the septic tank and was done in the middle of the day after notice, I do not believe there to be a constitutional problem here barring some additional new information.

obx, there is no reason to go to a judge. Again, she does not need a warrant.

If a meth dealer set up a lab on his lawn, the police would not need a warrant either.
 
"We have the legal system in place to take care of this type of disagreement. Go to a judge, show probable cause, get a warrant!"

It's been explained to you that under certain circumstances a warrant is not needed. Read the examples again and learn.

Here's another for instance. One evening I was working in the back yard - and about to light a smoke - when 3 firemen and 2 police officers walked around the side yard. A passerby had reported a natural gas leak and the firemen wanted to check the meter in my basement. As it turned out, the leak was across the street, but the gas was following the pipes under the street and coming up in odd places.

John
 
Obviously, whatever this unidentifiable public servant was looking for wan't such an urgent matter that she could not have taken the 5 seconds needed to get a warrant from a judge.

The "You don't need a warrant for..." crowd is happy with a status quo that is frankly unamerican. Just wait 'til it (whatever it is) happens to YOU, folks, because some new "decision" allowed it.

You guys are the "the law is the law" crowd, but you forget that the law includes the U.S. Constitution, and that any statute, regulation, or treaty that is repugnant to the Constitution is ILLEGAL!!

The law is the law. Yup. And illegal statutes abound. No "legal process" other than Constiutional amendment can make an illegal law legal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top